/  /.  l-L.l^ 

LIBRARY  OF  THE  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 

PRINCETON.     N.    J. 

Presented  by 

"TVieWfc^ow  of  GreorQ'eDu<5c\n  -, 

\l 

Division.JCj.^f\l  H" 

SecHonJUSS.£siJ  (* 

Copy  "2- 

- 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2010  with  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/bookofjudges42cass 


BOOK    OF    JUDGES. 


BT 

PAULUS  "OASSEL,  D.  D., 


PROFESSOR    IN    BERLIN. 


TRANSLATED   FROM  THE  GERMAN,  WITH  ADJHTIONS, 


P.  H.  STEENSTRA, 


rKoruaoft  or  biblical  utbrature  ih  the  pkotestant  episcopal  divinity  schooi 

AT   CAMBKIDGE.    v  \gs. 


NEW  YORK: 
CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S    SONS, 


letered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1871,  by 

Charles  Scribnee  and  Company, 
•  tae  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


INTRODUCTION. 

§  1.      Contents  and  Plan, 

1.  The  Book  of  Judges  is  in  a  special  sense  the  first  historical  book  of  Israel.  It  doe* 
not.  like  the  Book  of  Joshua,  relate  the  deeds  of  one  man,  nor  does  it,  like  the  last  four  books 
of  Moses,  revolve  around  the  commanding  figure  and  lofty  wisdom  of  a  prophet.  To  a  cer- 
tain extent,  this  book  also  is  a  Genesis.  The  first  book  of  the  Pentateuch  describes  the 
opening  period  of  the  primitive  patriarchal  family:  the  Book  of  Judges  relates  the  earliest 
history  of  the  people  of  Israel  in  Canaan.  "  The  children  of  Israel  asked  the  Lord,"  is 
its  opening  sentence.  It  rehearses  the  fortunes,  deeds,  and  sufferings  of  the  people,  as  they 
occurred  after  the  death  of  Joshua.  For  this  personage  was  only  the  testamentary  executor 
of  the  prophet  who  remained  behind  on  the  other  side  of  the  Jordan  (cf.  on  ch.  i.  1).  When 
he  also  died.  Israel,  the  heir,  deprived  both  of  the  authoritative  direction  of  Moses  and  the 
executive  guidance  of  Joshua,  entered  upon  the  independent  management  of  its  acquired 
possession.  The  Book  of  Joshua  is  the  history  of  a  conqueror  ;  the  Book  of  Judges  that  of  a 
people  for  the  first  time  in  possession.  Hitherto,  Israel  had  always  been  in  a  condition  of 
unrest  and  movement,  first  enslaved,  then  wandering  in  the  desert,  finally  undergoing  the 
hardships  of  the  camp  and  conquest ;  the  Book  of  Judges  exhibits  the  nation  in  the  first  period 
of  its  life  as  a  settled,  possessing,  and  peaceable  people.  Hitherto,  the  nation,  like  a  minor, 
had  been  authoritatively  directed  by  its  guardian  and  friend  ;  the  Book  of  Judges  opens  at  the 
moment  in  which  the  people  itself  is  to  assume  the  administration  of  its  affairs  in  accordance 
with  the  sacerdotal  and  civil  constitution  which  has  been  framed  for  it.  This  is  indicated,  from 
various  points  of  view,  by  the  name  which  our  Book  bears  in  the  Canon  :  Shophetim,  Judges. 
The  same  title  is  borne  by  the  Synagogue  pericope  which  begins,  at  Deut.  xvi.  18,  with  the 
command,  "  Thou  shalt  make  thee  Judges  (Shophetim)  in  all  thy  gates  which  the  Lord  thy 
God  giveth  thee."  Since  Moses  no  longer  exercised  his  legislative,  nor  Joshua  his  executive 
functions,  these  Shophetim  constituted  the  highest  civil  authority  (cf.  on  ch.  ii.  16),  who  in 
conjunction  with  the  priesthood,  were  to  watch  over  the  observance  of  the  law.  The  Book 
of  Judges,  accordingly,  recounts  the  history  of  the  times,  after  the  death  of  Joshua,  in  which 
the  governing  authority  in  Israel  was  to  be  exercised  by  the  Shophetim. 

2.  The  Biblical  books  are  throughout  books  of  instruction.  For  this  purpose,  and  this 
alone,  were  they  written.  Their  design  is  to  show  the  relations,  first  of  God,  and  through 
God  of  Israel,  to  history.  In  their  view,  all  history,  and  that  of  Israel  especially,  is  a  con- 
tinuous fulfillment  of  the  truth  and  purposes  of  God.  The  achievements  and  the  fortunes  of 
all  nations  are  the  consequences  of  their  moral  relations  to  God.  But  the  preeminence  of 
Israel  consists  in  this,  that  the  God  of  nature  and  of  time  was  first  revealed  to  it,  and  that  in 
the  Law  which  it  received  from  Him,  it  has  a  clear  and  definite  rule  by  which  it  can  order  its 
relations  to  God  and  know  the  moral  grounds  of  whatever  befalls  it.  Upon  the  observance 
of  this  law,  as  the  evidence  and  expression  of  faith  in  the  living  God,  the  freedom,  well-being, 
and  peace  of  Israel  repose.  This  had  been  made  known  to  the  people,  before  under  Joshua's 
direction  they  left  the  desert  and  addressed  themselves  to  the  conquest  of  Canaan.  If  after 
victory,  they  shall  observe  the  law,  and  be  mindful  of  their  calling  to  be  a  holy  People  of 
God,  prosperity  will  follow  them ;  if  not,  they  shall  fall  into  bondage,  poverty,  and  discord 
(Deut.  vii.  1  ff.).  The  Book  of  Judges  is  a  text-book  of  fulfillment  to  this  prediction.  The 
twenty-one  sections  of  which  it  consists  are  organically  put  together  for  this  purpose.  It 
may,  indeed,  be  said  that  there  are  three  principal  divisions  recognizable :  first,  chaps,  i.  and 


4  THE   BOOK   cr   „UDGES. 

ii. ;  secondly,  chaps,  iii.-xvi. ;  thirdly,  chaps,  xvii.-xxi.  But  the  lessons  which  these  thre« 
divisions  respectively  contain,  evince  precisely  the  organic  connection  in  which  the  whole 
narrative  stands  with  all  its  parts,  as  the  necessary  fulfillment  of  what  was  promised  in  the 
law.  The  first  two  chapters  are  a  pragmatic  introduction  to  the  history  of  the  book  as  a 
whole.  They  explain  the  possibility  of  the  events  about  to  be  related.  Not  in  the  history 
of  Joshua  could  the  germs  of  the  subsequent  conflicts  lie ;  for  Joshua  stood  in  the  spirit  of 
the  law,  and  moved  in  the  steps  of  Moses.  It  was  only  in  what  the  tribes  did  after  his  death, 
that  their  foundation  was  laid.  Accordingly,  when  ch.  i.  relates  the  prosecution  of  the  con- 
quest by  Israel,  its  main  object  in  so  doing  is  not  to  tell  what  was  conquered  and  how, 
but  rather  to  show  that  in  violation  of  the  Mosaic  command  the  tribes  failed  to  expel  the 
Canaanites.  In  consequence  of  this  failure,  the  forewarnings  of  the  law  (Deut.  vii.)  went 
into  fulfillment.  Peace  endured  only  so  long  as  the  elders  yet  lived  who  remembered  all  the 
great  works  that  were  done  for  Israel  at  their  entrance  into  Canaan  (Josh.  xxiv.  31).  The 
younger  generation  soon  fell  into  the  snares  of  temptation,  and  consequently  into  spiritual  and 
political  servitude.  In  distress,  indeed,  they  sought  after  God,  and  then  heroes  rose  up  among 
them,  who  were  truly  their  Judges,  and  who,  acting  in  the  spirit  of  God,  regained  their  lib- 
erty. Their  deeds  are  reported  in  chaps,  iii.-xvi.  But  the  root  of  the  evil  was  not  thereby 
removed.  Heathenism  continued  to  exist  in  the  bosom  of  Israel.  The  occasion  of  apostasy 
afforded  by  the  idolatry  of  the  Canaanites  was  permanent,  but  the  institution  of  the  judgeship 
was  transient.  The  service  of  Baal  perpetuated  itself  from  generation  to  generation  ;  but  the 
strength  and  energy  of  the  Judge  expired  with  the  person  in  whom  they  dwelt.  So  also  all 
those  judges  whom  according  to  the  law  Israel  was  to  elect  for  the  administration  of  its  local 
affairs  (Deut.  xvi.  18  f),  were  invested  with  merely  personal,  not  hereditary,  dignity.  The 
permanent  evil  was  not  confronted  with  any  equally  permanent  institution.  To  this  fact 
ch.  ii.  already  alludes;  for  it  says,  ver.  19,  that  "when  the  Judge  was  dead,  they  turned 
back." 

3.  In  consequence  of  this,  the  Book  of  Judges  is  the  book  of  fulfillment  from  yet  another 
point  of  view.  It  teaches  that  by  reason  of  the  fact  just  alluded  to,  the  hereditary  kingly 
office  had  to  be  set  up.  In  Deuteronomy  (xvi.  18  f.).  the  institution  of  Judges  in  all  the 
gates  of  Israel  is  immediately  followed  by  this  provision  (ch.  xvii.  14  ff.)  :  "  When  thou  art 
come  into  the  land  which  the  Lord  thy  God  giveth  thee,  and  shalt  possess  it,  and  shalt  dwell 
therein,  and  shalt  say,  I  will  set  a  king  over  me,  like  as  all  the  nations  that  are  about  me,  then 
shalt  thou  set  him  king  over  thee  whom  the  Lord  thy  God  shall  choose."  The  Book  of  Judges 
shows  that  this  result  was  unavoidable.  The  government  of  the  Judges,  it  points  out  already  in 
ch.  ii.,  has  no  traditional  strength.  The  authority  of  the  greatest  among  them  ceases  when 
he  dies.  Each  one  of  the  great  heroes  who  are  portrayed  from  ch.  iii.  onward,  affords  proof 
of  the  want  of  the  hereditary  kingly  office,  albeit  in  different  ways.  When  Othniel  died,  no 
second  hero  of  Judah  was  forthcoming  to  restrain  Israel  from  sin.  Ehud  was  a  deliverer 
(ch.  iii.),  but  he  is  not  even  called  a  Judge.  After  him,  the  work  of  delivering  and  judging 
devolved  on  a  woman,  and  Barak  was  willing  to  fight  only  if  she  went  with  him  (chaps,  iv., 
v.).  Gideon  became  inspired  with  courage  only  through  great  wonders  on  the  part  of  God 
(ch.  vi.)  ;  and  however  pious  and  great,  he  himself  occasioned  confusion  in  Israel  (ch.  viii. 
27).  Jephthah  had  no  legal  descent  of  any  kind.  Samson  was  an  incomparable  hero  ;  but 
he  fought  single-handed,  without  a  people  to  support  him. 

The  Judges  were  indeed  deliverers ;  but  their  authority  was  not  recognized  throughout  all 
Israel.  The  call  of  Deborah  was  answered  by  only  two  tribes.  Gideon's  leadership  was  at 
first  opposed  by  Ephraiin.  Jephthah  fell  into  sanguinary  discord  with  the  same  tribe.  Sam- 
son was  bound  to  be  delivered  up  to  the  Philistines  by  the  terror-stricken  tribe  of  Judah 
itself. 

The  judgeship  did  not  even  maintain  itself  within  the  same  tribe.  Of  the  six  principal 
heroes,  three  belonged  to  the  south,  —  Othniel,  Ehud,  Samson,  —  and  three  to  the  north, 
—  Barak,  Gideon,  Jephthah ;  none  to  Ephraim,  the  tribe  of  Joshua,  and  two  to  Man- 
isseh. 

The  title  of  the  hero  was  Sliophet,  Judge.  But  judges  there  were  always.  In  every  tribe, 
Jie  judge  was  the  local  magistrate.  The  hero  who  rose  up  to  conquer  bore  no  new  title. 
And  his  authority  was  merely  the  authority  of  the  common  Shophet  territorially  extended  by 
virtue  of  his  mighty  deeds.  But  whatever  unity  he  might  have  formed  during  his  activity, 
dissolved  itself  at  his  death.  The  tribes  then  stood  again  under  their  separate  Shophetim. 
Permanent  organic  connection  could  be  secured  only  through  a  king.     Without  this  common 


§  2.    TIME   OF   COMPOSITION. 


and  permanent  centre,  the  interests  of  the  several  tribes  diverged,  and  each  section  became 
indifferent  to  whatever  occurred  in  the  others.  National  interest  decayjd,  and  with  it,  of 
course,  national  strength.  The  narratives  of  chaps,  xvii.-xxi.  form,  it  is  true,  a  division  by 
themselves,  but  a  division  that  stands  in  organic  connection  with  the  whole  Book.  The 
events  there  related  do  not  follow  after  the  last  judge  of  whom  ch.  xvi.  speaks.  They  belong 
to  much  earlier  times,  and  yet  the  position  assigned  them  is  well  considered  and  instructive. 
They  demonstrate  by  new  and  striking  illustrations  the  necessity  of  the  kingly  office  ta 
strengthen  Israel,  within  and  without,  over  against  the  existing  idolatry,  which  could  main- 
tain itself  only  by  reason  of  the  divisions  and  want  of  unity  between  the  tribes  of  Israel.  The 
events  of  these  last  five  chapters  do  not  seem  to  have  occurred  under  the  tyranny  of  any 
hostile  king.  So  much  the  more  strikingly  do  they  set  forth  the  weakness  of  the  form  of 
government  which  Israel  had  at  that  time,  —  a  weakness  which,  to  be  sure,  had  its  ulti- 
mate oTound  in  the  weakness  of  the  people  itself.  They  show  the  decay  both  of  religion 
among  the  people  and  of  the  priesthood.  The  first  two  of  these  chapters  (xvii.  and  xviii.) 
teach  us  what  sins  in  spiritual  matters  and  what  deeds  of  civil  violence  were  possible  in 
Israel,  without  causing  the  whole  nation  to  rise  in  remonstrance.  The  last  two  show  the 
reverse  of  this,  namely,  the  fanaticism  of  self-righteousness  with  which  the  whole  people  pro- 
ceeded against  one  of  the  brotherhood  of  tribes,  reducing  it  even  to  the  verge  of  extinction. 
Both  kinds  of  sins  were  possible  only  because  the  hereditary,  general,  and  authoritative 
kin<dy  office  was  wanting,  which  everywhere  interposes  with  the  same  comprehensiveness  of 
view,  because  it  everywhere  governs  with  the  same  strength.  For  that  reason  the  narrator 
several  times  adds  the  remark  (ch.  xvii.  6,  xviii.  1,  xix.  1)  :  "  There  was  no  king  in  Israel." 
It  is  the  last  sentence  he  writes :  "  In  those  days  there  was  no  king  in  Israel ;  every  man  did 
that  which  was  right  in  his  own  eyes."  But  the  whole  Book  points  to  this  conclusion.  It  is 
the  essence  of  its  special  teaching.  It  is  that  which  makes  its  title  doubly  significant.  The 
civil  authority  of  the  Shophetim  would  have  sufficed,  if  Israel  had  been  obedient,  and  had 
not  retained  the  Canaanites  in  its  borders.  As  it  was  not  obedient,  it  needed  extraordinary 
Shophetim  to  effect  its  deliverance.  But  their  sporadic  activity  could  not  prevail  against  a 
permanent  evil.  This  the  concentrated  strength  of  the  kingly  office  alone  could  overcome ; 
just  as,  according  to  the  gospel,  every  evil  to  which  the  children  of  men  were  subject,  has 
been  dissolved  by  the  true  kingship  of  the  Son  of  God. 

§  2.      Time  of  Composition. 

The  doctrinal  tendency  which  we  thus  perceive  in  the  Book  is  of  great  importance ;  for 
it  undoubtedly  furnishes  a  clew  to  the  time  in  which  it  was  edited.  The  idea  of  explaining 
the  possibility  of  such  events  as  are  related  in  chaps,  xvii.-xxi.  by  the  remark,  "  There 
was  no  king  in  Israel,"  could  be  entertained  only  at  a  time  when  perfect  political  unity 
and  order  were  still  expected  to  result  from  the  kingly  office.  No  such  explanation  could 
have  been  appended  to  the  account  of  Micah  in  ch.  xvii.,  if  the  division  of  Israel,  and  thr 
institution  of  Jeroboam's  political  idolatry,  had  already' taken  place.  After  the  reigns  of 
various  sinful  kings  of  Judah  and  Israel  had  become  matters  of  history,  and  after  the  rebellion 
against  David  and  the  sanguinary  conflicts  between  Judah  and  Israel  had  taken  place,  the 
want  of  a  king  could  not  have  been  offered  in  explanation  of  the  civil  war  between  Israel 
and  Benjamin.  This  could  only  be  done  while  people  yet  looked  with  confidence  to  the 
kingly  office  for  certain  victory  without,  and  divine  peace  and  order  within.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  prominence  with  which  the  lack  of  hereditariness  in  the  judgeship,  and  the  want 
if  any  guaranty  against  apostasy  are  set  forth,  is  explainable  only  if  done  at  a  time  when  the 
jadicial  office  had  ceased  to  inspire  confidence.  There  is  but  one  period  in  the  history  of 
Israel  in  which  both  these  conditions  meet,  namely,  when  the  people  desired  a  kin'_r  from 
Samuel,  and  he  consecrated  Saul,  and  the  victories  of  the  latter  afforded  peace  within  and 
without.  The  Book  might  be  called  a  text-book  for  the  people,  collected  and  written  to 
instruct  and  establish  them  in  the  new  kingly  government. 

The  desire  for  a  king  appears  as  early  as  Gideon's  time.  After  that  hero's  victory,  the 
people  come  and  wish  to  have  him  for  a  king.  But  Gideon  declines,  and  our  author  mani- 
festly approves  his  course.  Abimelech's  disgraceful  kingship  is  minutely  related  ;  but  the 
parable  of  Jotham  sets  in  a  convincing  light  the  wrongfulness  of  the  manner  in  which  the 
trees,  i.  e.  the  people,  seek  to  make  a  kins.  A  king  so  made  can  be  of  no  service  to  Israel. 
Ii  is  written  (IVut.  xvii.  15)  :     "  Thou  shall  make  Mm   king  whom  the  Lord   shall  choose." 


r-  THE   BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


In  Samuel's  time,  also,  the  people  wish  a  king,  but  they  do  not  undertake  to  choose  ont 
themselves.  They  pray  Samuel  to  select  one  for  them;  and  it  is  only  at  God's  command 
that  Samuel  complies. 

Samuel,  as  chronologicaJlv  he  stands  between  King  Saul  and  the  Judges,  so  as  Prophet  and 
Priest  he  mediates  the  transition  from  the  judicial  to  the  kingly  office.  His  prophetic  ex- 
ercise i  if  the  judicial  office  first  teaches  the  people  how  rightly  to  desire  and  ask  for  a  kinir. 
It  i>  on  that  account  that  the  Book  of  Judges  closes  with  the  heroic  deeds  and  death  of  Sum- 
son.  The  age  of  heroes  is  past.  The  age  of  kings  can  begin  only  when  a  prophet  enjoys 
respect  as  a  judge  throughout  all  Israel,  which  had  never  been  the  case  before  Samuel. 
Hence,  this  prophet's  history  forms  the  introduction  to  the  history  of  the  kingship,  since  with- 
out his  consecration  no  king  could  exist.  This  is  why  the  Septuagint  and  the  "Vulgate  call 
the  Books  of  Samuel  the  First  and  Second  of  Kings. 

The  extreme  points  of  time  between  which  the  composition  of  our  Book  must  have  taken 
place,  may  easily  be  indicated.  It  must  have  been  later  than  the  great  victory  of  Samuel 
over  the  Philistines,  the  reformation  of  Israel,  and  the  return  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant  from 
exile  (cf.  on  ch.  xviii.  30).  One  consequence  of  the  reformation  was  that,  notwithstand- 
ing Samuel's  protest  at  first,  the  people  desired  a  king  ;  for  in  this  promised  office  they 
sought  security  both  against  their  enemies  and  against  themselves  and  their  own  unbe- 
lief. Another  consequence,  probably,  was  the  composition  of  this  manual  of  penitence  and 
instruction. 

On  the  other  hand,  our  Book  must  have  been  written  before  the  reign  of  David.  Jerusa- 
lem was  still  called  Jebus,  and  the  Jebusites  had  not  yet  been  expelled  (ch.  i.  21,  xix.  10). 
But  if  2  Sam.  v.  6  ff.  is  to  have  any  meaning  at  all,  it  must  refer  to  the  utter  destruction  of 
the  Jebusites'  power  by  David,  a  conclusion  which  the  whole  history  confirms.  Moreover 
if  our  Book  had  not  been  written  before  the  time  of  David,  references  to  his  reign  could  not 
be  wanting.  From  Othniel's  time,  the  tribe  of  Judah,  David's  tribe,  falls  into  the  back- 
ground. The  mention  of  it  in  the  history  of  Samson,  is  far  from  honorable.  The  relatively 
copious  treatment  of  affairs  in  which  Benjamin  figures,  points  to  the  time  of  King  Saul 
While  the  history  of  Othniel  is  quite  summarily  related,  that  of  Ehud  is  drawn  out  to  the 
minutest  detail.  Similarly  rich  is  the  flow  of  tradition  in  the  narrative  concerning  Gibeah 
(ch.  xix.  sea.).  Saul  says  of  himself  that  he  is  "  of  the  smallest  of  the  tribes"  (1  Sam.  ix. 
21).  This  history  of  Gibeah  explains  the  cause  of  Benjamin's  smallness,  and  traces  it  to  the 
savage  war  made  on  him  by  Israel. 

§  3.    The   Sources. 

1.  The  author  did  not  command  materials  in  equal  abundance  from  all  the  tribes.  A  full 
supply  flowed  in  upon  him  out  of  the  traditions  of  the  tribes  bordering  on  Ephraim,  namely, 
Benjamin,  Manasseh,  and  Dan.  The  story  of  Deborah  describes  the  heroic  exploit  of  Naph- 
tali  and  Zebulun;  but  Deborah  herself  resided  between  Ramah  and  Bethel,  on  Mount  Ephraim, 
near  the  confines  of  Benjamin.  Of  the  tribes  at  the  extremities  of  the  land,  of  Reuben 
(Gad  is  included  in  Gilead),  of  Simeon  (only  the  incident  in  ch.  i.),  of  Asher,  the  author's 
sources  afforded  scarcely  any  information.  Concerning  Judah's  preeminence,  only  ch.  i.  (cf. 
ch.  xx.  18)  communicates  anything.  Toward  Ephraim  (for  ch.  i.  22  ff,  refers  to  the  whole 
house  of  Joseph),  the  sources  nourish  an  unfavorable  disposition.  No  hero,  properly  speak- 
ing, came  out  of  Ephraim ;  for  of  Abdon  nothing  but  his  name  and  wealth  is  mentioned  (ch. 
xii.  I. 3).  Ephraim  originates  the  sinful  opposition  to  Gideon  and  Jephthah.  In  Ephraim 
Abimelech  plays  his  role  as  royal  usurper.  There  Micah  sets  up  his  false  religion.  Thence 
also  sprang  that  Levite  who  was  the  cause  of  the  civil  war.  It  must  not  be  overlooked  that 
lor  the  author  and  his  times  all  this  was  of  great  significance.  When  the  king  demanded  of 
Samuel  is  appointed,  he  is  not  chosen  out  of  Ephraim,  but  out  of  Benjamin.  The  author, 
who  favors  the  institution  of  the  kingship,  brings  the  moral  incapacity  which  Ephraim  as 
leading  tribe  has  hitherto  shown,  into  prominence.  The  priesthood,  it  is  true,  had  their  seat 
at  Shiloh.  But  the  whole  history  of  the  Judges  shows  the  powerlessness  of  the  priesthood 
in  times  of  danger.  The  facts  related  in  the  last  five  chapters  of  our  book,  by  way  of  sup- 
plement to  the  deeds  of  the  heroes,  are  sufficiently  indicative  of  the  fall  of  the  priestly 
tribe.  Such  things,  also,  as  are  told  of  Levites,  occurred  only  "  because  there  was  no  king.' 
Ephraim.  it  is  true,  gave  Samuel  to  the  nation,  the  restorer  of  Israel's  spiritual  strength, 
and  the  reformer  of  the  priesthood;  but  even  he  could  give  no  guaranty  for  his  children 
who  when   in  old  age  he  transfers  his  office  to  them,  do  not  walk  in  his  steps. 


§  3.     THE   SOURCES. 


2.  As  to  the  authorship  of  the  Book  of  Judges,  the  traditions  which  ascribe  it  to  Samne 
are  ancient;  but  if  in  such  obscure  matters  one  were  to  risk  a  conjecture,  he  would  hardly 
attach  himself  to  these  traditions.  The  Book  apparently  presupposes  the  reign  of  Saul,  just 
as  in  the  Books  of  Samuel  the  reign  of  David  is  presupposed.  To  record  the  deeds  and  in- 
structions of  God,  as  brought  to  view  in  the  history  of  the  nation,  was  certainly  a  well-con- 
sidered, and,  as  the  extant  sacred  writings  show,  a  fearlessly  and  honestly  executed  office 
If  this  was  the  office  held  by  the  mazkir  at  the  courts  of  David,  Solomon,  and  the  kings  in 
general  (cf.  2  Sam.  viii.  16,  1  Kings  iv.  3,  etc.),  it  would  be  natural  to  ascribe  our  Book  to 
a  Benjaminite  of  the  court  of  Saul.  This  man  had  before  him  narratives,  extending  over  a 
period  of  400  years,  which  must  have  been  written  by  contemporaries  of  the  events  related. 
Local  and  material  details  such  as  the  histories  of  Ehud,  Gideon,  Abimelech,  Jephthah,  Sam- 
son, as  also  those  of  Micah  anil  the  priest  at  Gibeah,  exhibit,  can  only  proceed  from  narra- 
tors who  stood  personally  near  the  events.  Nevertheless,  as  has  already  been  remarked,  an 
organic  recasting  of  the  materials  extends  through  the  whole  Book,  by  means  of  which  the 
doctrine  it  is  designed  to  teach  is  brought  prominently  to  view,  and  the  arrangement  of  the 
individual  narratives  determined.  To  this  it  is  owing  that  the  record  of  the  great  deeds 
achieved  by  the  Judges  closes  with  Samson,  although  it  is  not  certain  that  the  death  of  that 
hero  is  the  latest  event  of  the  Book,  and  also  that  the  narratives  concerning  Micah  and  Gib- 
eah stand  at  the  end,  although,  as  the  author  himself  does  not  conceal,  the  events  occurred 
much  earlier  (cf.  ch.  xviii.  12,  xiii.  25;  also,  xx.  23).  The  lesson  conveyed  in  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  Book,  especially  in  ch.  ii..  that  sin  and  apostasy  are  the  cause  of  servitude,  and 
that  apostasy  in  turn  is  the  consequence  of  the  people's  disobedience  in  not  expelling  the 
Canaanites,  is  brought  out  in  similar  turns  of  thought  and  expression  throughout  the  work 
(cf.  ch.  ii.  11,  iv.  1,  vi.  1,  x.  6,  xiii.  1  ;  ch.  ii.  14,  iii.  8,  x.  7  ;  ch.  ii.  17,  viii.  33,  x.  13  tf.). 
The  objection  that  chaps,  xvii.-xxi.  do  not  contain  such  expressions,  testifies  only  to  the 
clearness  and  order  which  everywhere  pervade  the  simple  narrative.  Until  the  story  reaches 
the  age  of  Samson,  these  expressions  occur  because  they  indicate  the  moral  links  in  the  his- 
torical connection.  But  chaps,  xvii.  -  xxi.  are  placed  outside  of  this  connection.  They  pre- 
sent occurrences  out  of  times  in  which  the  formula?,  "  the  sons  of  Israel  continued  to  do  evil  " 
(cf.  ch.  iv.  1,  etc.),  or,  "  they  did  evil  "  (cf.  ch.  ii.  11,  etc.),  were  not  properly  applicable,  since 
they  were  times  of  "  rest  "  to  the  land,  in  consequence  of  the  victories  of  one  great  Judge  or 
another  (cf.  ch.  iii.  11,  etc.).  Accordingly,  these  chapters  find  the  ground  of  the  evils  they  set 
forth  not  in  the  want  of  a  Shophet  but  of  a  king.  Their  unity  with  the  Book  as  a  whole,  ap- 
pears clearly  on  a  comparison  of  them,  as  to  style  and  diction,  with  the  introduction,  chaps, 
i.  -  iii. ;  as  again  similar  philological  characteristics  testify  to  the  unity  of  chaps,  i.  -  iii.  with 
iv.  -  xvi.  (cf.  Keil,  Lehrb.  der  hist.  krit.  Einleil.,  §  4  7,  notes  4  and  5). 

3.  Notwithstanding  this,  it  is  plain  that  the  different  narratives  of  the  Book  exhibit  a  dif- 
ference of  coloring  among  themselves.  This  could  not  be  otherwise.  From  the  earliest 
times  down  to  the  Middle  Ages,  it  has  ever  been  the  manner  of  the  chronicler  to  tell  his  story, 
for  the  most  part,  in  the  very  words  of  his  sources.  Precisely  the  Christian  historiography 
of  pious  men  in  mediasval  times  abounds  with  proofs  and  instructive  illustrations  of  this 
fact.  To  this  practice  the  numerous  liapax  lerjomena  of  our  Book,  found  nowhere  else,  are 
due  (cf.  ch.  i.  15,  iii.  22.  iv.  4-19,  v.  10,  28.  vii.  3,  xiv.  9-18,  xv.  8,  xviii.  7,  etc.)  ;  while  in 
many  places  traces  of  abridgment  by  the  author  might  be  pointed  out  (cf.  ch.  iv.  15,  xvi. 
13  tf.,  xx.).  The  communication  of  invaluable  contemporary  documents  like  the  Song 
of  Deborah  and  the  Parable  of  Jotham  not  only  confirms  this  explanation,  but  also  makes 
it  probable  that  in  other  parts  of  his  work  too  the  author  made  use  of  popular  and  heroic 
songs,  although  the  fact  that  his  prose  account  of  the  victory  of  Deborah  and  Barak  is  man- 
ifestly independent  of  the  Song  of  Deborah  shows  that  this  conjecture  is  to  be  applied  with 
great  caution. 

The  author  was  acquainted  with  the  contents  of  the  Book  of  Joshua  and  of  the  entire  Pen- 
tateuch. His  first  chapter  becomes  intelligible  only  when  viewed  in  connection  with  the 
Book  of  Joshua.  In  the  13th  chapter  of  that  Book,  the  Lord  says  to  Joshua  that  while  he  ia 
•)ld  much  land  remains  still  to  be  possessed.  The  territories  yet  to  be  conquered  are  indicated, 
and  orders  are  given  for  the  division  of  the  whole  land  among  the  tribes.  With  this  account 
ch.  i.  of  our  Book  connects  itself.  It  shows  what  conquests  remained  to  be  made,  from  what 
necessary  exertions  the  people  still  shrank,  and  where  contracts  of  toleration  were  still  made 
with  the  heathen  inhabitants.  The  enumeration  of  places,  especially  in  ch.  i.  27-36,  pre- 
•upposes  familiarity  with  chaps,  xiii.-xix.  of  Joshua  so  necessarily,  that  withoit  it  if  would 


8  THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


be  altogether  unintelligible.      Only  those  places  are  named  which  were  not  fully  subdued 
consequently,  the  knowledge  of  what  formed  the  entire  territory  allotted  to  each  tribe  is  pre- 
supposed.    But  this  knowledge  could  only  be  obtained  from  the  above-mentioned  chapters  in 
Joshua,  since  the  territorial  possessions  of  the  respective  tribes  had  nowhere  else  been  de- 
fined. 

In  fact,  the  Book  of  Judges  as  a  whole  sets  forth  the  fulfillment  of  what  was  contained  in 
the  Pentateuch  and  Joshua  :  its  author  must  therefore  have  been  acquainted  with  the  con- 
tents of  both.  Chapter  ii.  is  largely  made  up  of  sentences  found  in  the  last  four  books  of 
Moses  [cf.  Hengst.  Pentateuch,  Ryland's  ed.,  ii.  24  f.].  The  history  of  the  exodus  is  evi- 
dently known  to  the  author  in  the  very  words  of  the  Biblical  narrative  (cf.  ch.  ii.  12,  vi.  13) 
The  song  of  Deborah  speaks  in  like  manner  of  the  journey  through  the  desert  and  of  Sinai. 
The  narrative  of  the  discord  in  Shechem  (ch.  ix.  28),  reminds  one  of  the  story  of  Dinah 
(Gen.  xxxiv.)  ;  and  the  deed  in  Gibeah  is  related  in  phraseology  similar  to  that  used  in  the 
history  of  Lot  (Gen.  xix.).  We  must  here  glance  at  a  misunderstanding  emphatically  main- 
tained by  Bertheau  in  several  passages  of  his  Commentary.  The  Book  of  Judges,  he  asserts, 
contains  references  to  matters  that  occurred  under  Solomon,  and  therefore  its  author  must 
have  lived  after  this  king.  In  support  of  this,  he  refers  to  1  Kgs.  iv.  7-19  compared  with 
Judg.  i.  27,  28 ;  but  the  reference  proves  nothing.  The  passage  in  Kings  relates,  to  be  sure, 
that  Solomon  appointed  twelve  officers  over  all  the  realm,  whose  duty  it  was  to  provide  for 
the  royal  household.  Of  course,  the  districts  mentioned  Judg.  i.  27  fell  under  the  charge  of 
some  one  of  these  officers.  But  in  Judg.  i.  28,  it  is  stated  that  Manasseh  did  not  drive  out  the 
Canaanites  of  these  districts,  but  let  them  remain  on  condition  of  paying  tribute,  and  in  that 
we  are  to  find  a  reference  to  Solomon  1 !  As  if  Solomon  had  not  appointed  these  officers  over 
the  whole  kingdom !  or  as  if  their  appointment  had  any  reference  to  the  Canaanites  or  to 
"  tribute,"  neither  of  which  are  so  much  as  named  in  connection  with  it  1  A  measure  neces- 
sary in  every  regal  government  for  the  existence  of  the  state,  we  are  to  identify,  forsooth,  with 
a  measure  of  subjugation  against  enemies  in  a  district  1  The  very  passage  in  1  Kgs.  ix.  15- 
22,  which  Bertheau  connects  with  1  Kgs.  iv.  7-19.  should  have  shown  him  the  true  nature  of 
the  appointment  of  these  officers.  For  these  verses,  while  they  state  that  Solomon  made  serfs 
of  the  still  remaining  heathen,  expressly  add  that  he  did  not  make  servants  of  any  Israelites. 
But  this  action  of  Solomon  toward  heathen  is  not  the  subject  of  discourse  at  1  Kgs.  iv.  7-19, 
where  officers  are  appointed  over  all  Israel ;  and  as  little  in  Judges  i.  28,  which  speaks  of 
the  time  when  Israel  grew  strong  (which  it  certainly  had  been  long  before  Solomon's  day), 
and  imposed  tribute  1  upon  the  Canaanites.  This  is  the  very  thing  for  which  Manasseh  is 
blamed,  that  when  it  grew  strong,  instead  of  expelling  the  heathen  inhabitants,  it  made  them 
tributary,  thus  sowing  the  seeds  of  future  sin.  The  whole  passage,  if  it  referred  to  Solomon, 
would  be  senseless.     And  why,  if  the  author  thought  of  Solomon,  did  he  not  name  him  ? 

Yet  more  singular  is  another  conjecture  put  forth  by  Studer  and  Bertheau.  Judg.  i.  29  states 
that  Ephraim  did  not  drive  the  Canaanites  out  of  Gezer,  but  that  they  continued  to  dwell 
there.  Now,  we  read  in  1  Kgs.  ix.  16  ff.,  that  an  Egyptian  Pharaoh  conquered  Gezer,  and 
slew  the  Canaanites,  after  which  Solomon  rebuilt  the  city.  To  this  conquest,  now,  we  are  to 
suppose  the  author  of  Judges  alludes  in  ch.  i.  29  !  But  the  author  manifestly  knows  only 
this,  that  the  Canaanite  still  dwelt  in  Gezer !  Had  he  alluded  to  the  conquest  of  Gezer  and 
its  rebuilding,  he  must  have  told  of  the  destruction  of  the  Canaanite ;  for  at  the  time  of 
Solomon's  rebuilding,  the  Canaanite  was  no  longer  there !  Of  such  grounds  as  these  for 
bringing  down  the  date  at  which  our  book  was  written,  Bertheau  has  four  more  (p.  xxix.)  : 
1.  His  interpretation  of  ch.  xviii.  30,  which  he  thinks  may  refer  either  to  the  Assyrian  or 
Babylonian  conquest,  on  which  see  the  commentary  below.  2.  The  expression  "  until  this 
clay  "  (ch.  i.  21,  26,  vi.  24,  x.  4,  etc.),  implies  a  long  lapse  of  time  between  the  occurrence 
and  the  author.  But  even  fifty  years  would  suffice,  and  the  author  had  a  period  of  four  cen- 
turies under  review.  3.  The  author  was  acquainted  with  regal  government  in  Israel  (ch.  xvii. 
6,  xviii.  1,  etc.).  Undoubtedly,  because  lie  lived  under  Saul,  and  therefore  also,  4.  Shi- 
loh  had  ceased  to  be  the  seat  of  the  priesthood.  But  how  all  this  can  be  made  to  prove  ths 
composition  of  the  Book  of  Judges  in  the  Assyrian  period,  it  is  hard  to  say.  Bertheau  (aftei 
alters)  speaks  of  a  cycle  of  twelve  judges;  but  to  justify  this,  either  Barak  or  Abimelech 
must  be  omitted.  The  Jews  counted  fourteen.  The  number  seven  can  only  be  got  by  force 
•or  the  Book  contains  eight  extended  biographical  sketches,  to  which  Othniel  is  to  be  added 

1  DQ,    the  difference  between  which  and   ~OV    — ^,   1  Kgs.  is.  21,  is  also  to  be  noted. 


§  3.     THE   SOURCES.  9 

All  such  play  on  numbers,  which  if  the  author  had  intended  or  found,  he  would  have 
unquestionably  set  forth  clearly  and  boldly,  can  at  best  neither  prove  nor  disprove  any- 
thing. 

4.  But  it  is  precisely  the  traces  by  which  the  author's  use  of  earlier  narratives  is  indi- 
cated, that  testify  to  his  freedom  and  originality.  They  show  a  natural  and  living  appro- 
priation of  sacred  history  and  its  teaching,  not  a  slavish  and  mechanical  borrowing.  The 
language  of  our  Book,  too,  contains  expressions  not  found  in  the  Pentateuch  and  in  Joshua 
(cf.  on  ch.  ii.  14  and  18,  xx.  26,  and  Keil,  I.  c).  The  manner  in  which  earlier  history 
records  occurrences  analogous  to  those  which  our  author  has  to  relate,  is  recalled  with  free- 
dom, without  servile  imitation.  Compare,  e.  g.  the  account  of  the  appearance  of  the  angel  to 
Gideon  and  the  kindling  of  his  present,  with  that  of  the  visit  of  the  angels  to  Abraham  (Gen. 
xviii.)  and  the  kindling  of  his  sacrifice  ( Gen.  xv.  1 7)  ;  the  story  of  Jephthah's  vow  with 
Abrabam"s  offering  up  of  Isaac  (Gen.  xxii.). 

Very  significant  is  the  clearly  discriminating  use  of  the  divine  names  Jehovah  and  Elo- 
him.  the  former  of  which  constantly  designates  the  absolute  God  who  has  revealed  himself  to 
Israel,  while  the  latter  expresses  the  general  conception  of  Deity,  as  recognized  also  by  heathen- 
ism. The  nations  of  Canaan  were  not  without  Elohim  on  whom  to  call.  But  Baal  and  Ash- 
taroth  were  false  Elohim.  Israel  had  the  true  Deity,  the  only  Elohim  (DVibSiT):  the  living 
Jehovah.  This  God  of  Israel  the  heathen,  and  with  them  the  apostate  Israelites  themselves, 
did  indeed  consider  and  speak  of  as  an  Elohim ;  but  he  was  no  nature-deity,  but  the  God  of 
Israel's  history.  Jehovah,  the  Deliverer  from  Egypt,  the  mighty  wonder-worker,  the  Creator 
of  all  men.  The  use  of  the  names  Jehovah  and  Elohim  is  indicative  of  the  difference  be- 
tween Israel  and  the  nations  in  their  relations  to  the  true  God  and  in  their  views  of  the  uni- 
verse. It  implies  not  different  documents  but  different  spiritual  conditions ;  and  the  profound 
subtiltv  of  the  narrative  is  shown  nowhere  more  strikingly  than  in  the  alternation  of  these 
names.  When  the  heathen  Adonibezek  speaks,  in  ch.  i.,  he  uses  Elohim.  Ehud,  when  he 
addresses  King  E'^lon,  says  Elohim;  but  when  he  speaks  to  Israel,  Jehovah  (cf.  ch.  iii.  20, 
28).  Micah's  private  chapel  is  merely  called  a  house  of  Elohim  (ch.  xvii.  5),  although  he 
himself  pretends  to  serve  Jehovah.  To  sinning  Ephraim  Gideon  speaks  only  of  Elohim,  just 
as  this  name  only  occurs  in  the  history  of  Abimelech.  The  name  used  corresponds  with  the 
spirit  of  those  by  whom  or  in  whose  ears  it  is  spoken.  In  Micah's  idolatrous  temple,  in  the 
Shechem  of  Abimelech's  time,  and  in  Ephraim's  pride,  the  fear  of  the  true  God  of  Israel 
does  not  manifest  itself. 

Occasionally,  Jehovah  and  ha-Elohim  (Q>ribsn),  the  God,  sc.  of  Israel,  are  used  inter- 
changeably ;  but  yet  not  altogether  as  equivalents.  Even  the  heathen  Midianites  may  speak 
of  the  God  of  Israel  as  ha-Elohim  (ch.  vii.  14),  but  not  as  Jehovah.  The  latter  is  only  put 
into  the  mouths  of  such  as  worship  the  Holy  One  in  full  faith.  Very  instructive  in  this 
respect  is  the  alternation  of  the  divine  names  in  the  accounts  of  the  angelophanies  to  Gideon 
and  the  parents  of  Samson.  The  angels  appear  in  human  form,  but  their  exalted  naturt 
shines  through  the  lowlier  appearance.  On  this  account,  an  angel  (ch.  xiii.  6),  as  also  a 
prophet,  may  be  called  an  Ish  ha-Elohim,  a  godlike  man ;  but  no  one  is  ever  called  Ish 
Jehovah,  a  Jehovah-like  man.  That  description  can  be  applied  to  neither  angel  nor  man. 
The  divine  appearance  in  the  human  form  under  which  the  angel  comes,  can  only  be 
described  by  the  term  Elohim,  or,  in  so  far  as  its  source  in  the  God  of  Israel  is  to  be  specially 
indicated,  by  ha-Elohim.1  True,  the  expression  "  Angel  of  Jehovah  "  may  be  used  as  well 
as  "  Angel  of  ha-Elohim  ;  "  but  still,  in  ch.  vi.  20,  21,  these  expressions  seem  to  be  distin- 
guished from  each  other  in  such  a  way,  that  the  latter  designates  the  angel  simply  in  his 
appearance  (ver.  20),  the  former  as  the  possessor  of  supernatural  powers  (ver.  21).  When 
Gideon  once  more  hesitates,  and  desires  to  assure  himself  whether  he  be  really  the  chosen 
deliverer,  and  therefore  longs  to  have  the  reality  of  the  angelic  appearance  already  enjoyed 
confirmed,  he  addresses  himself  to  ha-Elohim  (vers.  36,  39).  It  may  indeed  appear  strange 
that  in  connection  with  the  answer  in  ver.  40  simply  Elohim  is  used ;  but  the  explanation  is 
that  the  meaning  being  plain,  the  article  is  omitted  as  unnecessary. 

Ll  The  author  seems  to  take  the  genitive  in  C^H^SH  ti^S,  as  a  gen.  of  quality,  as  in  C^— "1  It^S, 
'  an  eloquent  man."  But  this  is  certainly  incorrect.  The  expression  rf  man  of  God,"  does  not  indicate  subjective  char- 
acter or  nature,  but  objective  official  relations.  First  applied  to  Moses  (Deut.  xxxiii.  1),  it  waf  commonly  used  to  desig- 
nate a  prophet.  It  denotes  a  man  whom  God  has  taken  into  relations  of  peculiar  intimacy  Witt  himself  in  order  through 
him  to  instruct  and  lead  his  people  The  genitive  may  be  denned  as  the  gen.  of  the  principal,  frori  whom  the  "  man  ' 
derives  his  knowledge  and  power,  and  for  whom  he  acts.  —  Tr.J 


10  THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


ft.  These  discriminations  between  the  divine  names  are  not  to  be  ascribed  to  our  author  in 
any  such  sense  as  if  the  earlier  times  which  he  describes,  and  the  sources  which  came  down 
to  him  out  of  them,  had  not  yet  possessed  any  clear  perception  of  them.  All  tradition,  in 
whatever  form  he  used  it,  narrative  ana  song,  was  pervaded  with  the  same  consciousness  as 
that  which  lives  in  Biblical  books  and  doctrines,  from  which  indeed  it  had  derived  them. 
The  Song  of  Deborah,  the  documentary  character  and  genuineness  of  which  are  undoubted, 
celebrates  with  prophetic  power  the  Jehovah  of  the  generations  of  Israel.  The  document 
which  Jephthah  sends  to  the  king  of  Ammon  shows  a  living  knowledge  of  the  contents  and 
language  of  the  Books  of  Moses,  although  it  treats  both  with  great  freedom.  If  Gideon  did 
not  live  in  the  consciousness  of  the  authoritative  God,  who  revealed  himself  in  the  law,  and 
led  Israel  through  the  desert  into  Canaan,  he  could  not  say,  while  refusing  an  offered  crown, 
"  Jehovah  shall  rule  over  you  "  (ch.  viii.  23).  When  Jephthah  makes  a  vow,  he  makes  it 
not  after  the  model  of  any  heathen  usage,  but  in  the  language,  form,  and  spirit  of  the  Israel- 
itish  vow,  as  regulated  by  Moses.  The  story  of  Samson  becomes  intelligible  only  by  the 
light  of  the  Nazaritic  institute  of  the  Pentateuch  (Num.  vi.).  The  priestly  body  comes  to 
view  in  the  service  with  Urim  (ch.  i.  2,  xx.  18).  Respect  for  the  priesthood  shows  itself 
plainly,  albeit  in  a  perversion  of  it,  in  the  conduct  of  Micah  (ch.  xvii.  13).  The  officiating 
Levite  is  known  by  his  priestly  dress,  furnished  with  the  prescribed  bells  (ch.  xviii.  3).  It 
is  undoubtedly  true  that  the  circumstances  of  the  Levites,  as  they  come  to  view  here  anq 
there,  as  also  the  story  in  ch.  xix.,  indicate  a  wretched  condition  of  the  order ;  but  decay 
implies  vigor,  just  as  caricature  implies  truth.  The  false  ephod  points  to  the  true ;  the  idol 
altar  of  Gideon's  father,  to  that  which  his  son  erects  in  the  place  of  it.  The  Book  of  Judges 
treats  of  great  international  conflicts.  But  these  wars  are  waged  by  the  nations  of  Canaan 
not  only  against  the  strange  people,  but  against  that  people's  God.  No  conflict  had  ever 
arisen,  but  for  Israel's  Jehovah,  from  whom  his  people  derived  their  national  existence  and 
character,  —  and,  indeed,  it  was  only  the  living  Jehovah,  who  would  not  suffer  himself  to  be 
represented  by  dead  images,  that  could  produce  this  deep  and  lasting  antagonism.  Without 
him,  Israel  could  not  have  maintained  itself  in  a  struggle  of  four  hundred  years,  to  be  finally 
victorious,  and  to  find  itself  in  possession  of  solid  foundations  for  future  civil  and  religious 
life. 

Of  course,  the  Book  of  Judges  does  not  aim  at  giving  a  history  of  the  general  culture  of 
the  age,  after  the  manner  of  modern  times.  That  it  says  so  little  of  the  priestly  institutions 
and  the  law,  proves  only  that  it  presupposes  them  as  known.  It  is  certain,  at  least,  that  the 
discourses  of  the  prophetic  messengers  (chaps,  ii.  and  x.),  like  the  whole  Book,  explain 
the  several  apostasies  of  the  nation  out  of  the  decay  of  their  religious  and  spiritual 
life. 

To  infer  from  the  abnormities  that  come  to  view,  as  the  idolatry  in  Ophra,  the  sin  of  Abim- 
elech,  the  discord  between  the  tribes  under  Jephthah,  the  abomination  in  Gibeah,  and  the 
wretched  condition  of  the  Levites,  that  the  law,  in  all  the  fullness  of  its  instructions,  was  not 
yet  known  or  published,  would  be  a  singular  procedure.  As  if  during  the  times  succeeding 
Clovis  there  had  been  no  churches,  no  bishops,  no  Christian  people,  in  Gaul,  notwithstanding 
the  horrible  deeds  of  the  kings  and  their  helpers  !  Or  as  if  in  our  own  day  and  land,  in  winch 
the  Christian  Church  and  Christian  doctrine  are  unquestionably  prevalent,  the  presence  and 
existence  of  these  might  nevertheless  be  denied,  because  of  the  abominations  of  apostasy 
which  come  to  light,  as  to  morals,  in  police-reports,  and  as  to  doctrine  in  the  myriad  books 
of  modern  idolatry  !  It  is  the  nature  of  Biblical  historiography  to  disclose  the  truth,  without 
regard  to  men  and  without  flattery.  It  does  not,  in  modern  fashion,  glorify  in  breathless 
declamations  the  dutiful  deeds  of  the  "  faithful  " ;  it  mentions  them  in  few  words.  But  it 
brings  the  disgrace  and  punishment  of  sin  into  the  foreground,  in  order  to  warn  against 
transgression  and  induce  repentance.  That  it  has  become  common,  especially  since  the 
rationalistic  period,  to  represent  the  age  of  the  Judges  as  wild  and  barbarous,  only  shows  that 
men  are  prone  to  overlook  the  vices  and  bloodshed  peculiar  to  their  own  day.  Our  Book 
••overs  a  space  of  four  hundred  years.  Now,  as  the  periods  of  servitude  are  characterized  as 
times  of  apostasy,  while  those  of  independence  are  represented  as  times  of  order,  it  is  not 
unimportant  to  observe  that  apostasy  prevailed  during  but  one  third  of  the  time  descril«d. 


§  4.    CHRONOLOGY.  1 1 


§  4.      Chronology. 

1.  The  Book  of  Judges  contains  also  chronological  data  in  connection  with  the  occurrencei 
which  it  records.  It  is  a  suggestive  fact,  with  reference  to  the  peculiarities  of  his  sources, 
and  the  manner  in  which  he  used  them,  that  the  first  numerical  statement  of  time  given  by 
the  author  refers  to  the  duration  of  the  oppression  of  Israel  by  Chushan  Rishathaim,  king  of 
Aram.  Concerning  the  occurrences  between  the  death  of  Joshua  and  the  time  of  Chushan, 
related  in  the  introductory  chapters,  no  dates  are  given,  and  their  duration  can  only  be 
approximately  ascertained.  The  table  of  chronological  data  is  conveniently  divided  into  two 
parts  :  from  Chushan  to  the  domination  of  Ammon,  and  from  that  to  the  death  of  Samson. 

Israel  served  Chushan 8  years. 

Had  rest  under  Othuiel 40 

Served  Moab 18 

Had  rest  under  Ehud 80      ^       (40  ■>) 

Served  Jabin 20 

Had  rest  under  Barak 40 

Served  Midian      .     .  .  7 

Had  rest  under  Gideon      .     .  40 

Was  ruled  by  Abimelech  .     .  3 

Had  Tola  for  Judge 23      jj 

Jair,  Judge .  22 

Total 301  years.  (261  ?) 

Among  these  numbers,  only  the  statement  that  after  Ehud's  victory  there  followed  eighty 
years  of  rest,  excites  special  attention.  The  number  forty  is  by  no  means  an  unhistorical, 
round  number.  Nevertheless,  it  seems  manifestly  to  express  the  duration  of  a  period,  par- 
ticularly that  of  a  generation.  In  forty  years  the  generation  of  the  desert  died  out  (cf.  Num. 
xiv.  33).  The  statements  that  after  the  achievements  of  Othniel,  Deborah,  and  Gideon, 
respectively,  a  period  of  forty  years  passed  in  rest,  bring  to  light  the  internal  ground  of  re- 
newed apostasy,  already  indicated  in  the  introduction  (ch.  ii.  10),  namely,  that  after  the  death 
of  the  generation  which  had  witnessed  the  deeds  of  the  heroes,  another  rose  up  which  had  no 
living  remembrance  of  them.  So  much  stress  may  properly  be  laid  on  this  internal  ground,  as 
to  make  the  number  eighty  after  Ehud's  exploit  very  remarkable  in  its  singularity ;  so  remark- 
able, in  fact,  as  to  incline  one  to  suppose  that  the  original  reading  was  forty.  Apart  from  every 
other  consideration,  this  supposition  would  have  much  in  its  favor,  if  it  were  certain  —  which, 
however,  despite  the  statement  in  ch.  iv.  1,  it  is  not  —  that  the  number  in  question  was  also 
intended  to  give  the  length  of  Ehud's  subsequent  life.  It  would  also  give  a  clearness  unu- 
sual in  chronological  matters  to  the  statement  of  Jephthah  that  three  hundred  years  had 
passed  since  Israel  gained  a  firm  footing  in  Heshbon,  beyond  the  Jordan  (ch.  xi.  26).  For 
from  the  year  in  which  Jephthah  says  this,  backward  to  the  first  year  of  Chushan,  would  on 
this  reckoning  be  261  -f-  18  =  279  years.  Twenty  years  would  very  satisfactorily  till  up  the 
gap  between  the  last  of  Joshua's  conquests  and  the  commencement  of  the  Aramsean  domina- 
tion. For  although  the  kings  of  Sihon  and  Og  were  defeated  by  Moses  seven  years  earlier,  the 
two  and  a  half  trans-Jordanic  tribes  came  into  possession,  properly  speaking,  only  after  the 
conquest  of  Canaan  (Josh.  xxii.).  If  the  number  eighty  be  left  untouched,  we  get  a  period  of 
three  hundred  and  nineteen  years  from  Jephthah  back  to  Chushan's  domination,  to  which  the 
interval  of  twenty  (or  twenty-seven)  years  must  be  added,  for  this  length  of  time  must  in  any 
case  have  elapsed  between  the  entrance  into  Canaan  and  the  invasion  of  Chushan  (cf.  ch.  ii. 
10,  iii.  7).  But  it  is  natural  to  suppose  that  Jephthah  in  his  letter  to  the  king  of  Ammon 
would  use  the  larger,  not  the  smaller,  number  of  which  the  case  admitted,  in  order  to  prove 
the  right  of  Israel  to  its  land.  The  change  of  eighty  into  forty  is  also  of  importance  with 
reference  to  other  chronological  combinations,  as  will  appear  farther  on. 

2.  In  ch.  x.  7  the  historian  states  that  God,  by  reason  of  Israel's  renewed  apostasy,  deliv- 
jred  them  into  the  hands  of  the  Philistines  and  Ammonites.  The  statement  gives  the  impres- 
sion that  this  domination  of  these  nations  over  Israel  was  contemporaneous,  but  exerted  over 
different  parts  of  the  land.  The  narrative  then  proceeds  to  speak  first  of  the  tyranny  of 
Amnion,  which  lasted  eighteen  years,  and  then  of  that  of  the  Philistines,  which  continued 
forty  years.  From  the  first  of  these  oppressors,  Jephthah  delivered  the  eastern  tribes  ; 
against  the  other,  Samson  began  the  war  of  liberation. 


12  THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 

It  certainly  seems  as  if  the  author  of  our  Book  wished  to  convey  the  lesson  that,  as  timf 
went  on,  the  condition  of  kingless  Israel  became  continually  worse.  At  first,  hostile  attacks 
had  come  from  one  side  only  ;  a  great  victory  was  then  won,  and  "  the  land  rested."  After 
Gideon,  this  expression  no  longer  occurs.  Moreover,  it  is  never  said  of  subsequent  heroes 
that  "  they  judged  :  "  and  the  duration  of  their  official  activity  no  longer  reaches  to  forty 
years.      These  facts  are  not  to  be  neglected  in  our  chronological  survey. 

The  combination  of  the  chronological  data  of  the  Book  of  Judges  with  those  found  else- 
where, and  especially  with  the  well-known  statement  in  1  Kgs.  vi.  1,  according  to  which  four 
hundred  and  eighty  years  intervened  between  the  exodus  from  Egypt  and  the  building  of  the 
temple,  is  still  attended  with  difficulty.  Doubtless,  the  difficulty  is  itself  a  most  striking 
proof  of  the  antiquity,  originality,  and  independence  of  our  Book.  Had  it  been  composed  at 
a  late  period,  by  the  same  hand  that  wrote  the  Books  of  Kings,  would  not  its  author  have 
attempted  to  get  rid  of  these  remarkable  difficulties  ?  But  the  fidelity  of  the  Old  Testament 
tradition  never  shows  itself  more  clearly  than  in  cases  in  which,  according  to  modern  notions, 
it  had  been  so  easy  for  an  editor  to  remove  all  occasion  for  resorting  to  hypotheses.  For 
without  these,  it  is  at  this  day  impossible  to  produce  agreement.  We  know  that  agreement 
must  exist,  —  for,  surely,  ancient  authors  were  not  incapable  of  arithmetical  addition  1  —  but 
coercive,  scientific  proof  of  it,  we  do  not  possess.  The  opinions  of  even  the  oldest  Jewish 
chronologists  were  divergent.  In  support  of  our  hypothesis  we  adduce  the  passage  1  Sam. 
xii.  11,  where  it  is  said  that  "Jehovah  sent  Jerubbaal,  and  Bedan,  and  Jephthah,  and  Sam- 
uel," and  delivered  Israel  from  their  enemies  round  about.  Now,  Bedan  is,  without  doubt,  to 
be  understood  of  Samson,  the  hero  out  of  Dan.  The  passage,  therefore,  presents  the  pecu- 
liarity that  it  places  Samson  before  Jephthah.  Keil  insists  that  the  Ammonitish  and  Philis- 
tine oppressions  occurred,  not  successively,  but  simultaneously.  It  is  undoubtedly  correct  to 
gay,  that  we  are  not  first  to  sum  up  the  numbers  relating  to  the  occurrences  set  forth  in 
chaps,  xi.  and  xii.  thus  :  — 

Ammon 18  years. 

Jephthah 6      " 

Ibzan 7      " 

Elon 10      " 

Abdon 8      " 

Total 49  years. 

and  then  add  the  years  of  the  Philistine  domination  and  those  of  Samson.  Just  as  in  1  Sam 
xii.  11,  Samson  stands  before  Jephthah,  so  in  Judg.  x.  7  the  Philistines  are  named  before  the 
Ammonites :  "  Jehovah  gave  Israel  into  the  hands  of  the  Philistines  and  of  the  sons  of 
Ammon."  That  notwithstanding  this  Jephthah's  deeds  are  first  related,  has  its  ground  in 
the  fact  that  in  this  way  the  achievements  against  the  Philistines  connect  themselves  with  the 
principal  wars  of  Israel  in  the  days  of  Samuel  and  Saul.  According  to  ch.  xiii.  1,  the  Philis- 
tine domination  lasted  forty  years.  After  Samson's  great  victory  at  Lehi,  it  is  remarked,  ch. 
xv.  20,  and  afterwards  repeated,  that  "  he  judged  Israel  twenty  years."  These  twenty  years 
cannot  be  included  in  the  forty.  It  is  against  the  spirit  of  the  Book,  after  such  a  victory  to 
speak  of  Samson's  "judging,"  and  yet  to  suppose  that  at  the  same  time  Israel  continues  to  be 
given  "  into  the  hands  of  the  Philistines."  Therefore,  when  the  prediction  concerning  Sam 
son  (ch.  xiii.  5)  only  says  that  "  he  shall  begin  to  deliver  Israel,"  the  meaning  is  that  he  will 
not  thoroughly  subdue  them,  as  was  done  in  the  days  of  Samuel  and  David,  for  after  the 
death  of  Samson  their  power  again  became  dominant.  Now,  if  this  be  undoubtedly  correct, 
the  supposition  that  the  Ammonitish  and  Philistine  servitudes  commenced  exactly  at  the  same 
time,  would  compel  us,  notwithstanding  1  Sam.  xii.  11,  to  place  Jephthah  lomr  before  Samson; 
for  the  Ammonitish  domination  lasted  only  eighteen  years,  and  Jephthah  ruled  only  six.  The 
following  conjecture  is  therefore  to  be  preferred:  With  Gideon's  death  the  land  ceased  "to 
have  rest."  Judges  of  forty  years'  service  appear  no  more ;  but  a  servitude  of  forty  years 
begins.  The  Philistine  attack  occurred  perhaps  soon  after  Abimelech,  induced  probably  by 
reports  of  the  discord  that  prevailed  in  Israel.  While  in  the  North  ami  East  Tola  and  Jair 
judged  forty-five  years,  the  Philistine  servitude  began  in  the  southwest ;  and  while  Ammon 
>ppressed  Gilead  in  the  East,  Samson  smote  the  Philistines  in  the  southwest.  The  Gilead- 
ites  make  Jephthah  their  chieftain  "  because  he  had  begun  to  smite  the  enemy  "  (cf.  on  ch.  xi. 
1,2);  for  Samson  also  had  become  Judge  when  he  had  commenced  to  put  down  the  Philis- 
tines (c{.  on  ch.  xv.  20). 


§  4.     CHRONOLOGY. 


13 


Tl  e  combination  of  the  chronological  data  of  our  Book  with  those  of  Samuel  and  especially 
the  important  one  in  1  Kgs.  vi.  1,  is  further  facilitated  by  the  fact  that  in  1  Sam.  xii.  11,  Eli 
is  not  named  between  Jephthah  and  Samuel.  The  inference  from  this  omission  is,  that  the 
forty  years  dur.ng  which  he  ruled,  are  not  to  be  separately  taken  into  account.  He  was 
high-priest  during  the  occurrence  of  the  events  in  the  North  and  South.  The  following  addi- 
tional conjectures  may  therefore  be  regarded  as  probable :  The  war  spoken  of  in  1  Sam.  iv.  1, 
commenced  by  Israel  against  the  Philistines,  may  be  held  to  indicate  the  new  vigor  which 
the  victories  of  Samson  and  the  terrible  catastrophe  at  Gaza  had  infused  into  the  people. 
About  thirty  years  had  probably  elapsed  since  the  death  of  Samson.  Then  follow  twenty 
years  of  penitence  on  the  part  of  Israel  (1  Sam.  vii.  2),  dated  from  the  exile  of  the  ark  and 
its  restoration  to  Kirjath-jeariin,  that  great  event  with  which  the  Book  of  Judges  is  also 
acquainted.  If  next,  according  to  ancient  tradition,  we  add  forty  years  for  the  time  of  Sam- 
uel and  Saul,  and  forty  for  the  reign  of  David,  we  arrive  at  the  number  four  hundred  and 
eighty  in  a  manner  sufficiently  satisfactory  and  historically  probable,  as  shown  by  the  follow- 
ing tables  :  — 

Wanderings  in  the  desert    .     40 
Conquest  of  the  land  ...       7 

Until  Chushan 20 

Ehud     .     .  40       Amnion      .     .  li]        f  Samson  .     .  20 

=  90 


Chushan 

.     8 

Abimelech 

.     3 

Othsiel 
Moab 

.   40 
.  18 

Tola     .     . 
Jair      .     . 

.  23 
.  22 

= 

Philistines   .  40 

Ehud 

.  40 

Amnion 

.   IS 

'  Samson  .     .  20 

Jabin 

.  20 

Jephthah 

.     6 

Barak  . 

.  40 

Ibzan    .     . 

7 

.—  . 

Erom   death 

Midian  . 

7 

Elon     .     . 

.   10 

of  Samson  to 

GlDEON 

.  40 

Abdon  .     . 

■     8. 

k  Sam'l,  about  30 

213 


97 


Samuel  before  the  victory  (1  Sam.  vii.  10)  20 

Samuel  and  Saul 40 

David 40 

Solomon      3 

103 


Therefore,  From  Exodus  to  Chushan  .  .  67 
Chushan  to  Gideon  ....  213 
Abimelech  to  Abdon  ...  97 
Samuel  to  Solomon  ....  103 


480  years. 

Those  who  accept  the  eighty  years  of  Ehud,  as  has  hitherto  been  done,  are  obliged  with 
Keil  to  reduce  the  interval  from  the  death  of  Moses  to  Chushan  to  seventeen  years,  and  that 
from  the  death  of  Jair  to  Solomon  to  one  hundred  and  twenty-three,  whereby  Samson's  judge- 
ship vanishes,  and  no  account  is  taken  of  the  twenty  years  preceding  the  victory  undei 
Samuel. 

3.  In  conclusion,  we  remark  that  in  the  historical  sketch  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  Acts  xiii.  18- 
20,  where  he  says,  ver.  18,  "  and  God  nourished  (ZTpotpo(p6pri<Tti>}  them  forty  years  in  the  wilder- 
ness ;  "  ver.  19,  "  and  destroying  seven  nations  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  he  divided  their  land  to 
them  by  lot ;  "  ver.  20,  "  and  after  that  he  gave  them  Judges  for  about  four  hundred  and  eighty 
years,  until  Samuel  the  prophet,"  the  reading  four  hundred  and  eighty  can  scarcely  be  the 
original  one.  The  apostle  evidently  had  his  eye  on  our  canonical  books:  in  vers.  17  and  18, 
on  the  Books  of  Moses  ;  in  ver.  19,  on  the  Book  of  Joshua ;  in  ver.  20,  on  the  Book  of  Judges  ; 
for  this  is  followed  by  references  to  the  Books  of  Samuel.  As  he  was  undoubtedly  acquainted 
with  the  number  four  hundred  and  eighty  in  Kings,  he  could  not  assign  four  hundred  and 
fifty  years  to  the  period  from  Joshua  to  Samuel,  with  which  moreover  no  ancient  tradition 
coincided.  The  conjectural  reading,  three  hundred  and  fifty,  appears  therefore  to  be  prefera- 
ble ;  and  it  is  certainly  not  a  matter  of  indifference  that,  adding  the  numbers  one  after  another 
as  was  done  by  Jewish  tradition  in  general,  three  hundred  and  fifty  years  would  actually 
represent  the  period  from  Chushan  to  the  end  of  the  Philistine  domination.  True,  it  would 
show  that  Paul  also  read  only  forty  years  in  connection  with  Ehud.  The  objection  that  Paul 
also  assigns  a  definite  period  of  forty  years  for  the  reign  of  Saul,  for  which  the  Old  Testa- 
ment gives  no  authority,  is  destitute  of  force.  For  the  Book  of  Samuel  gives  no  information 
at  all  concerning  the  length  of  this  king's  reign,  and  the  Apostle  followed  the  view,  enter- 
tained also  by  Josephus  {Ant.  vi.  14,  9),  according  to  which  the  reign  of  Saul,  during  and 
ifter  the  lifetime  of  Samuel,  lasted  forty  years.  It  was  sought  in  this  way  to  explain  1  Sam. 
ciii.  1. 


[Note  by  the  translator.     Keil  and  Bachmann,  both  of  whom  have   repeatedly  in- 
vestigated the  chronology  of  the  Book  of  Judges,  have  come  to  conclusions  somewhat  different 


14  THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


from  those  of  our  author.  As  their  schemes  essentially  agree,  it  will  be  sufficient  to  indicate 
that  of  Bachmann,  the  latest  published  and  the  least  accessible  to  the  English  reader.  It 
may  be  found  in  his  commentary,  Das  Buck  der  Richter,  vol.  i.  pp.  53-74.  Its  turning  points 
so  far  as  they  differ  from  our  author's,  may  be  briefly  stated  as  follows:  (1.)  It  adheres  in 
every  instance  to  the  numbers  given  ;  hence,  the  period  from  Chushan  to  Gideon  inclusive  (<•). 
the  table  above),  becomes  two  hundred  and  fifty-three  years.  (2.)  It  makes  the  forty  yean 
Philistine  servitude  come  to  an  end  with  the  victory  near  Mizpeh.  (3.)  While  it  makes  tin 
Ammonitish  and  Philistine  servitudes  synchronistic  in  the  main,  as  required  by  ch.  x.  7,  it  sup- 
poses the  beginning  of  the  Philistine  to  fall  from  three  to  five  years  later  than  that  of  the  Am- 
monitish oppression.  If  they  began  simultaneously,  it  would  follow  that  a  new  Judge,  Abdon, 
was  somewhere  recognized  after  Samuel  had  already  assembled  all  the  house  of  Israel,  and  had 
shown  himself  the  Judge  and  deliverer  of  all  Israel  (ef.  1  Sam.  vii.  3,  5,  6),  which  is  not  likely. 
Abdon,  however,  having  once  beeu  recognized  as  Judge,  before  the  victory  under  Samuel, 
might  continue  to  be  regarded  as  such  until  his  death.  It  is  only  necessary,  therefore,  to  bring 
down  the  beginning  of  the  Philistine  servitude  far  enough  to  allow  of  this  previous  recogni- 
tion. (4.)  It  includes  the  twenty  years  of  Samson  in  the  "  days  of  the  Philistines,"  according  to 
ch.  xv.  20.  It  supposes  Samson  to  begin  his  work  as  a  young  man  of  eighteen  or  nineteen 
years  of  age  (cf.  ch.  xiv.  4  ff.),  and  thus  allows  his  birth  to  fall  after  the  beginning  of  the  Phil- 
istine servitude,  as  demanded  bych.  xiii.  5.  (5.)  As  to  Eli,  since  his  pontificate  ended  twenty 
years  before  the  victory  of  Mizpeh,  its  beginning  must  antedate  the  commencement  of  the 
Philistine  oppression  by  twenty,  and  the  Ammonitish  by  from  fifteen  to  seventeen  years. 
And,  in  fact,  the  earlier  years  of  Eli's  pontificate  afford  no  traces  of  hostile  oppression.  The 
people  journey  to  the  great  festivals  regularly  and  securely  (1  Sam.  i.  3,  7,  21,  24;  ii.  1 9 J  ; 
and  even  the  sins  of  the  sons  of  Eli,  by  which  the  people  also  are  led  astray  (1  Sam.  ii.  17, 
24),  are  such  as  bespeak  a  time  of  careless  security  and  prosperity.  The  following  table 
exhibits  the  results  thus  obtained,  for  the  time  beginning  with  the  Ammonitish  and  ending 
with  the  Philistine  oppression.  The  figures  at  the  left  denote  years  after  the  death  of 
Jair  :  — 

1  Ammonitish  servitude  begins  in  the     Eli  is  in  the  seventeenth  year  of  his  pontificate. 
East,  and  continues  eighteen  years. 

4 In   this  year  or  one  year  earlier  or  later,  the 

Philistine  servitude  begins  in  the  West. 
18  Jephthah    breaks    the  Ammonitish 
yoke,  and  judges  six  years. 

22 Samson   begins  his  career,  as  a  young  man  of 

eighteen  to  nineteen  years. 
24  Ibzan,  Judge,  seven  years.  Eli  dies.    Samuel. 

31   Elon,  Judge,  ten  years. 
41  Abdon  becomes  Judge,  and  rules 
eight  years 

42 Samson  dies. 

44  The   third   year  of  Abdon's  Judge-     The  victory   uear  Mizpeh,  under  Samuel,  ends 
ship.  the  Philistine  servitude,  1  Sam.  rii.  , 

Now,  allowing  ten  years,  instead  of  Dr.  Cassel's  twenty,  for  the  interval  between  tha 
division  of  the  land  and  the  invasion  of  Chushan,  and  retaining  the  eighty  years  of  Ehud, 
we  get, — 

From  the  Exodus  to  Chushan,  57  years. 

From  Chushan  to  Gideon 253       " 

From  Abimelech  to  Mizpeh 92       " 

Samuel  and  Saul,  40  ;  David,  40  ;  Solomon,  3, 83       " 

Total .  485  years. 

This  total,  which  it  would  be  more  proper  to  express  variably  as  four  hundred  and  eighty- 
four  to  four  hundred  and  eighty-six,  is  not  so  far  away  from  four  hundred  and  eight}  as  to 
occasion  any  difficulty.  In  the  first  place  it  may  be  questioned  whether  the  three  years  of 
Abimelech  ought  to  be  reckoned  in  ;  and  in  the  second  place,  it  is  highly  probable  that  some 
of  the  periods  include  fractional  years,  so  that  the  last  year  of  one  and  the  first  of  the  next 
properly  form  but  one,  whereas  in  the  process  of  addition  they  come  to  stand  for  two.  But 
are  not  tei  years  too  short  to  cover  the  interval  between  the  division  of  the  land  and  the 
nroad  c'  Chushan-Rishathaim  ?     No,  says  Bachmann,  p.  7  2ff.,  "for,  1.   Nothing  demands  a 


§  5.     CRITICAL   AND   EXEGETICAL   HELPS.  15 


lengthened  period  between  the  death  of  Joshua  and  the  beginning  of  the  Mesopotamia 
servitude.  The  passage  at  ch.  ii.  11  ff.  does  not  describe  an  earlier  visitation  than  the  Meso- 
potamian,  but  merely  gives  a  general  view  of  the  causes  and  consequences  of  all  the  visita- 
tions about  to  be  related.  Under  the  "ins  "IT?,  the  "  other  generation,"  cf.  ch.  ii.  10,  neither  a 
chronological  generation  of  forty  years  (Bertheau),  nor  a  familia  eminens,  that  placed  itself 
at  the  head  of  the  nation  (M.  Hartmann),  is  to  be  understood.  Nor  does  the  remark  of  ch. 
ii.  7,  about  the  elders  who  "  outlived  Joshua,"  require  any  considerable  number  of  years.  It 
merely  affirms  that  they  outlived  him,  without  saying  that  they  outlived  him  long.  If  in  the 
second  year  of  the  Exodus  these  elders  were  eighteen  or  nineteen  years  old  (Num.  xiv. 
29),  at  the  division  of  the  land,  that  is  38+7  years  later,  they  would  be  sixty-three  or 
sixty-four ;  and  ten  years  more,  until  the  first  hostile  oppression,  would  suffice  fully  to  bring 
them  to  that  age  which  according  to  Ps.  xc.  10  constituted  the  highest  average  of  human 
life  even  in  the  time  of  Moses.  Nor,  finally,  is  it  necessary  to  assign  much  time  to  the  pro- 
cess of  moral  deterioration  in  Israel  (ch.  ii.  6  ff.)  ;  for  this  began  and  went  on  progressively  in 
and  even  before  the  days  of  the  elders,  and  it  was  only  the  completed  apostasy  to  idolatry 
that  ensued  after  their  death.  2.  From  Josh.  xiii.  1,  compared  with  xiv.  10  ff.  it  is  evident 
that  Joshua  cannot  have  continued  to  live  long  after  the  division  of  the  land.  While  the 
second  of  these  passages  represents  Caleb,  at  the  age  of  eighty-five  years,  still  full  of  youth- 
ful strength  and  perfectly  ready  to  undertake  the  conquest  of  his  inheritance,  the  first  gives 
the  great  age  of  Joshua  as  the  reason  for  the  command  to  divide  the  land,  although  the 
conquest  was  yet  far  from  complete.  And  since  exactly  the  same  expression  recurs  in  ch. 
xxiii.  1,  2,  it  is  impossible  to  suppose  that  the  farewell  gatherings  of  chaps,  xxiii.  and  xxiv., 
which  were  held  shortly  before  the  death  of  Joshua  (ch.  xxiii.  14),  took  place  many  years 
later.  Neither  the  D^ai  C^\  "  many  days,"  of  ch.  xxiii.  1,  nor  the  circumstance  that,  ac- 
cording to  ch.  xix.  50,  Joshua  built  a  city  and  lived  in  it,  can  prove  the  contrary  ;  for  a  few 
years'  time  satisfies  them  both.  Nor  is  there  any  ground  in  Ex.  xxxiii.  11  and  Num.  xi.  28 
for  inferring  that  Joshua  must  have  lived  a  considerable  time  after  the  division  of  the  land ; 
for  the  term  ~TS2  denotes  office,  not  age,  and  ynpsiS,  even  if  we  explain  it  "  from  his  youth  " 
("  of  his  chosen  ones,"  is  probably  to  be  preferred,  cf.  the  Sept.  and  Vulg.),  does  not  assert 
that  Joshua  was  then  a  young  man.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  only  when  we  assume  that 
Joshua  died  at  a  relatively  early  date,  that  the  contents  of  Judg.  i.  1-21  appear  in  their 
true  light.  But  especially  decisive  for  the  utmost  possible  reduction  of  the  length  of  the  in- 
terval in  question  is  the  passage  Judg.  xi.  26.  According  to  this  passage,  three  hundred 
years  had  elapsed  since  Israel  took  possession  of  the  land  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan.  Now, 
between  the  Mesopotamian  invasion  and  the  death  of  Jair,  there  lies  a  period  of  three  hun- 
dred and  one,  or,  excluding  Abimelech,  two  hundred  and  ninety-eight  years.  It  is  evident, 
therefore,  that,  reckoning  Jephthah's  three  hundred  years  from  the  dismissal  of  the  eastern 
tribes  (Josh,  xxii.)  to  the  attack  of  the  Ammonites  (Judg.  x.  7),  the  shorter  the  preceding 
period  be  computed,  the  closer  becomes  the  agreement  between  the  historical  fact  and  the 
approximate  number  of  Jephthah.  It  is  manifestly  more  likely  that  three  hundred  and  eight 
to  three  hundred  and  eleven,  than  that  three  hundred  and  thirty  to  three  hundred  and  fort) 
or  more  years,  should  be  roundly  represented  as  three  hundred.  We  hold,  therefore,  with 
Llditfoot  (Opp.  i.  42),  S.  Schmid,  Vitringa,  Keil,  and  others,  hat  an  interval  of  about  ten 
years,  as  left  at  our  disposal  by  our  computation  of  the  chronology  of  the  whole  period,  is  in 
fact  fully  sufficient  for  the  events  between  the  division  and  the  first  subjugation  of  the  land  ; 
and  we  accordingly  reject,  as  wholly  groundless  extensions  of  the  chronological  frame,  the  as- 
sumption, since  Josephus  (Ant.  v.  1,  29;  vi.  5,  4)  almost  become  traditional,  that  twenty-five 
years  are  to  be  allowed  for  Joshua,  and  eighteen  for  the  "  elders  ;  "  the  computation  of  vari- 
ous Rabbins  (Sed.  Olam,  Isaaki,  Abr.  Zakut,  and  others),  which  assigns  twenty-eight  years 
to  Joshua  and  the  "elders"  together;   and  every  other  similar  hypothesis."  —  Tr.] 

§  5.   Critical  and  Exegetical  Helps. 

1.  In  the  criticism  and  translation  of  the  Hebrew  text,  constant  use  has  been  made  of  the 
large  Rabbinic  Bible  published  at  Venice,  1617-1618  by  Petrus  and  Laurentius  Bragadin,  af- 
'.er  the  Bomberg  edition.  Compare  the  preface  by  Judah  Arjeh  of  Modena,  corrector  of 
Jie  work.  Use  has  also  been  made  of  the  Biblia  Universa,  published  in  1657,  at  Leipzig,  by 
Christian  Kirchner.  after  the    edition  of  B.  A.  Montanus.      Compare  the   preface    prefixed  to 


16  THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


the  work  by  the  Dean  and  Theological  Faculty  of  the  University  of  Leipzig.  Also  of  the 
Bihlia  Hebraica  of  Joh.  H.  Michaelis,  Halle,  1 720 ;  the  Biblia  of  Ddderlein  and  Meisner,  as 
edited  by  Knapp,  1819  ;  and  the  edition  of  the  Book  of  Judges,  with  a  German  translation 
and  commentary,  by  Mair  Obernik,  Fiirth,  1805. 

A  treatment  of  the  text  such  as  has  recently  again  been  attempted  by  the  wild  theories  of 
Geiger,  Dozy,  and  others,  is  at  variance  with  the  laws  of  objective  scientific  criticism,  and 
renders  textual  tradition,  language,  and  contents  so  many  footballs  for  subjective  caprice.  If* 
application  is  the  more  to  be  lamented,  since  it  also  increases  the  difficulties  of  such  criticism 
as  is  both  necessary  and  in  accord  with  the  spirit  of  Holy  Scripture.  But  we  must  not  be 
hindered  by  excesses  of  this  kind  from  acknowledging,  that  it  is  more  in  keeping  with  piety 
toward  the  sacred  volume  to  venture  upon  textual  emendations  in  a  few  passages  than  to 
reject  them.  This  conviction  has  governed  us  in  the  exposition  of  several  passages  (cf.  on 
ch.  ii.  3,  iv.  15,  v.  11,  vii.  6  and  8),  and  especially  in  the  treatment  of  ch.  xviii.  30,  where 
it  is  shown  that  the  antiquity  of  the  current  reading  is  by  no  means  a  guaranty  of  its  correct- 
ness, but  only  a  proof  of  the  fidelity  of  the  Masoretic  tradition. 

It  is  unfortunately  impracticable  here  to  institute  a  closer  collation  of  the  Hebrew  text 
with  the  LXX.  and  the  Targum,  as  also  with  Josephus,  than  has  been  incidentally  done  in 
the  exposition.  It  is,  however,  a  matter  sufficiently  necessary,  not  to  be  neglected  hereafter. 
The  beginnings  made  by  Ziegler  (Bemerkungen  iiber  das  Buch  d.  Richter,  in  the  Theol. 
Abhandl.,  Gbttingen,  1791)  and  Frankel  (in  his  Vorstudien  zur  Septuaginta,  Leipzig,  1841) 
are  certainly  still  in  want  of  a  thorough  continuation. 

The  Syriac  version  of  the  Books  of  Judges  and  Ruth  by  Paul  of  Telia  (beginning  of  the 
7th  century),  has  been  published  at  Copenhagen,  by  Th.  Skat  Rdrdam :  Libri  Judicum  el 
Ruth,  secundum  versionum  Si/riaco-Hexaplarem,  Havnias,  1859.  The  exposition  of  the  Mi- 
drash  on  the  Book  of  Judges,  is  given  in  the  Jalkut  Shimeoni,  by  R.  Simeon,  of  Frankfurt, 
Venice  edition,  printed  by  Bragadin,  torn.  ii. 

For  assistance  in  gaining  acquaintance  with  Talmudic  expositions,  the  following  works 
may  be  consulted  :  Nachalath  Shimeoni,  by  R.  Simeon,  of  Lissa,  ed.  Wandsbeck  ;  Toledoth 
Jakob,  by  R.  Jakob  Sasportas,  Amsterdam,  1657,  4to;  Sepher  Mareh  Kohen,  by  R.  Isaehar, 
Cracow  edition,  1689,  4to.  The  Jewish  expositors  of  the  Middle  Ages,  R.  Solomon  Isaaki 
(i.  e.  Raschi,  frequently  but  improperly  called  Jarchi),  R.  David  Kimchi  (Redat),  R.  Levi 
ben  Gerson  (Ralbag),  and  other  expositions,  are  found  in  the  large  Rabbinic  Bibles.  The 
commentary  of  R.  Isaak  Abarbanel  on  the  Prophetce  Priores  appeared  at  Leipzig,  1686. 

Expositions,  partly  excellent,  of  passages  of  our  Book,  by  the  Caraite  Aaron,  are  found  in 
Wolff's  Bibliotheca  Hebraza,  Hamburg,  1715-43.  A  Jewish  German  translation  in  rhyme  is 
found  in  Koheleth  Jakob,  Prague,  1 763,  but  with  expositions  and  legends  intermixed.  A 
better,  older,  and  literal  Jewish  German  translation  appeared  at  Amsterdam,  1679,  fol.  In 
more  recent  times  several  synagogue  versions  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  have  been  printed.  Of 
these  that  which  appeared  under  the  conduct  of  Dr.  Zunz  adheres  most  closely  to  the  Maso- 
retic text,  cf.  Orient.  Literaturbl.,  1840,  p.  618. 

The  Book  of  Judges  as  a  whole  did  not  receive  separate  and  special  treatment  at  the 
hands  of  the  earlier  Christian  exegesis.  We  must  here  refer  to  the  general  introductions  to 
the  O.  T.  for  information  concerning  editions  and  expositions  which  include  our  Book. 
Jerome,  Theodoret,  and,  later,  Rhabanus  Maurus  and  Rupert  von  Deutz,  might  be  particu- 
larly mentioned. 

Among  the  later  Roman  Catholic  expositors  Serarius  stands  preeminent  on  account  of 
his  diligence  and  voluminousness  :  Commentarii  in  libros  Judicum  et  Ruth,  Paris,  1611, 
Moguntia;,  1619.  Among  Protestant  expositors  Brentius,  Bucer,  P.  Martyr,  Chytraus,  Seb. 
Schmid,  Osiander,  Starke,  and  Drusius,  are  still  worthy  of  attention.  The  commentary  of 
Le  Clerc  began  the  rationalistic  mode  of  exposition,  and  has  furnished  it  with  most  of  its 
jtaterials.  It  is  only  forty  years  since  the  Book  began  again  to  receive  any  real  attention. 
For  ten  years  the  commentary  of  Studer,  Das  Buch  der  Richter,  grammatish  und  historisch 
trkldrt,  Bern,  1835,  almost  entirely  controlled  the  exposition.  Valuable  matter  was  contrib- 
jted  by  Hengstenberg,  die  Authentic  des  Pentateuchs  [translated  into  English  by  Ryland, 
inder  the  title  Dissertations  on  the.  Genuineness  of  the  Pentateuch,  Edinburgh,  1847.. —  Ti:.]. 
Still  longer  than  Studer  did  Bertheau's  exposition,  Das  Buch  der  Richter  und  Rut,  Leipzig, 
1845,  maintain  its  prominence,  to  which  for  that  reason  special  attention  is  given  in  the 
present  work.  The  first  volume  of  C.  R.  Keil's  Biblischer  Commentar  iiber  die  Prophetischer. 
Geschichtsbiicher  des  A.  T.,  containing  Joshua,  Judges,  and   Ruth   (Leipzig,  1863),  appeared 


§  5.     CRITICAL  AND   EXEGETICAL  HELPS.  17 

after  the  greater  part  of  our  Book  was  finished.  The  author's  theological  attitude,  diligence, 
and  erudition  are  in  no  need  of  special  characterization  in  this  place.  [Since  the  publica- 
tion of  Dr.  Cassel's  work,  the  first  volume  of  a  new  commentary  by  Dr.  Joh.  Bachmann,  Pro- 
fessor at  Rostock,  has  appeared,  entitled,  Das  Bach  der  Richter,  mit  besonderer  Riicksicht  auf 
die  Geschichte  seiner  Auslegung  und  kirchlichen  Verwendung  erkldrt,  etc.,  Berlin,  Ersten 
Bandes  erste  H'alfte,  1868,  Zweite  Halfte,  1869.  Theologically,  the  author  stands  on  sub- 
stantially the  same  ground  with  Cassel  and  Keil.  His  work  is  thorough  and  exhaustive. 
For  English  works  on  the  whole  Bible,  cf.  the  commentary  on  Matthew,  p.  19.  We  here 
add  :  Bush,  Notes  Critical  and  Practical  on  the  Book  of  Judges,  New  York ;  and  the  Books 
of  Joshua,  Judges,  and  Ruth  ;  with  Notes  and  Introductions  by  Chr.  Wordsworth,  I).  D., 
London,  1865,  forming  Part  I.  of  vol.  ii.  of  The  Holy  Bible  :  with  Notes,  etc.,  by  the  same 
author.  Dr.  Wordsworth  is  learned  and  devout,  but  somewhat  too  much  given  to  allegori- 
zing —  Tr.] 

It  cannot  be  desirable  to  enumerate  here  all  the  exegetical  introductions  and  other  writings 
more  remotely  connected  with  the  business  of  exposition.  For  such  enumeration  we  refer  to 
Danz's  Unioersalworterbuch,  to  the  works  named  by  Dr.  Lange  in  the  commentary  on  Gene- 
sis, and  to  the  older  general  commentaries  of  Starke,  Lisco,  and  Gerlach.  It  is  sufficient 
here  to  mention  the  Introductions  of  Havernick  and  Keil,  Ewald's  Geschichte  Israels,  and 
Stahelin's  Untersuchungen  uber  den  Pentateuch,  die  Bilcher  Joshua,  Richter,  etc.,  Berlin,  1843. 
Much  that  is  excellent  —  to  confine  ourselves  to  what  specially  belongs  here  —  is  contained 
in  the  little  work  of  Prof.  Wahl,  Ueber  den  Verfasser  des  Buches  der  Richter,  a  "  programme  " 
of  the  Gymnasium  and  Realschule  at  Ellwangen,  1859.  Compare  also  Nagelsbach,  s.  v. 
Richter,  in  Herzog's  Real  Encyklopadie,  vol.  xiii. ;  and  in  general,  the  articles  of  this  encyclo- 
paedia on  the  several  Judges. 

On  the  chronology  of  the  Book,  the  following  works  deserve  to  be  mentioned  :  Jewish  — 
the  Sepher  Juchasin,  by  Abraham  Sacuto,  Amsterdam,  1717;  Tsemach  David,  by  David 
Gans,  in  the  edition  of  Vorstius,  Hebrew  and  Latin,  1644,  4to  ;  and  Seder  Haddoroth,  by  R. 
Jechiel,  of  Minsk,  1810,  fol.  Herzfeld,  Chronologia  Judicumet  primorum  Regum  Hebraorum, 
Berolini.  1836  ;  and  Bachmann,  Si/mbolarum  ad  tempora  Judicum  recte  constituenda  specimt  n 
(Rostock  University  "Programme"  for  1860).  The  very  latest  conjectures  maybe  found 
in  Rockerath,  Bibl.  Chronologie,  Minister,  1865. 

2.  Of  writings  treating  single  parts  of  the  Book  of  Judges,  the  number  is  larger.  The 
Song  of  Deborah  has  been  especially  favored.  We  mention  the  following  : 1  Lette,  Animad- 
versiones  Sacra;,  L.  Bat.  1759.  Ruckersfelder,  Sylloge  comentt.  et  observatt.  philol.  exeget., 
Deventirae,  1762.  Wilh.  Abrah.  Teller,  Uebers.  des  Segens  Jakobs  und  Mosis,  insgleichen  des 
Liedes  der  Israeliten  und  der  Deborn.  etc..  Halle  and  Helrnst.,  1766.  Schnurrer,  Diss,  in 
Deborm-Canticum,  Tub.  1775  (cf.  his  Dissent.  Phil.  Critical,  Gothaa,  1790).  Kbhler,  Nachlese 
einiger  Anmerkk.  uber  das  Siegeslied  der  Deb.,  in  Eichhorn's  Repertorium  for  1780,  p.  163  if. 
Hollmann,  Comment,  phil.  crit.  in  Carmen  Deboroz,  Lips.  1818.  Kohler,  in  the  Studien  und 
Kritihen  for  1831,  pp.  72-76.  Kemink,  Commentatio  de  Carmine  Debora,  Traj.  ad  Rhen., 
1840.  Kalkar,  Questionum  Biblic.  Specimen,  I.,  Othinise,  1835.  Bbttger,  in  Kauffer's  Bib- 
lischen  Studien  (only  to  ver.  23),  Dresden  and  Leipzig,  1842-44.  Gumpach,  Alttestament- 
lichen  Studien,  Heidelberg,  1852.  Sack,  Die  Lieder  in  den  historischen  Biichern  des  A.  T., 
Barmen,  1864.  Among  translations,  that  of  Herder,  in  his  Geist  der  Hebraischen  Poesie,  ii. 
196  (Cotta's  edition  of  his  works,  1852),  still  holds  its  merited  rank.  Little  known,  and  yet 
not  unimportant,  is  that  of  J.  C.  W.  Scherer,  in  Irene,  a  monthly  periodical  by  G.  A.  v. 
Halem,  Minister,  1804,  i.  44.  Less  valuable  is  Debora,  a  Portrait  of  Female  Character,  by 
E.  Munch,  in  Minerva,  an  annual,  for  1828,  p.  339.  Many  excellent  remarks  on  the  Song 
of  Deborah  are  found  in  Lowth's  celebrated  book  on  Hebrew  Poetry ;  but  the  annotations  of 
Schmidt  (in  Auszuge  aus  Lowth's  Vorlesungen,  Dantzig,  1793)  are  worthless. 

In  the  exposition  of  the  Song  below,  compression  has  been  so  much  sought  after,  that  its 
brevity,  in  view  of  the  many  new  explanations  that  are  offered,  may  be  deemed  a  fault. 
Some  improvement  may  perhaps  be  made  in  this  respect  hereafter. 

The  history  of  Jephtbah  has  experienced  an  equally  abundant  treatment.  To  the  literature 
■nentioned  in  the  exposition  below,  we  here  add  the  following  :  Reinke,  Beitrdge  zur  Erklarung 
ies  A.  T.,  Miinster,  1852.  Very  sensible  remarks  against  the  assumption  that  Jephthah'a 
daughter  was  sacrificed  are  found  in  Schedius,  Syngramma  de  Diis  Germanis,  Halaa,  1728. 
A  discourse  on  "  Jephthah's  Sacrifice,"  with  special  reference  to  the  importance  of  vows  of 

l  The  Jewish  traditions  concerning  Deborah  are  given  in  a  popular  form  in  Btth  Jisrael,  Amsterdam,  1724. 
2 


18  THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 

homage,  may  be  found  among  the  Discourses  of  the  Stolberg  Chancellor,  Job.  Tiiius,  Hal 
berstadt,  1678.  F.  Ranke,  also,  in  his  Klaglied  der  Hebrder,  felt  himself  oblige* I  to  fellow  the 
old  view.  It  is  a  curiosity  of  uncommon  ignorance  that  in  the  French  Opera  L'Eufaii. 
Prodigue,  of  Sue  and  Auber,  the  bride  of  the  Prodigal,  that  is  to  say,  a  woman,  is  named 
Jephthah. 

Roskoff,  in  his  work  Die  Simsonssage,  nach  ihrer  Entstehung,  Form,  und  Bedeutung,  und 
der  Heraklesmythus,  Leipzig,  1860,  gives  the  literature  of  those  writings  in  which  Samson  is 
put  on  a  parallel  with  Hercules.  The  author's  own  zeal  for  the  parallelism  is  far  more  mod- 
erate than  that  of  E.  Meier,  for  instance,  in  his  Gesch.  der  poetischen  Nationalliteratur  der 
Hebrder,  Leipzig,  1856  But  even  his  admissions  we  have  not  been  able  to  consider  well 
founded  and  trustworthy.  We  cannot  believe,  for  instance,  that  there  is  such  similarity 
between  the  answer  to  Samson's  prayer,  after  his  exploit  at  Lehi,  and  the  myth  which 
recounts  how  Hercules,  when  unable  to  sleep  on  account  of  crickets,  got  rid  of  them,  as  to 
make  it  a  safe  foundation  for  scientific  results.  And  it  is  only  the  thorough-going  establish- 
ment of  the  historical  and  moral  as  well  as  ideal  difference  between  the  two  characters  thai 
can  give  any  real  significance  to  other  analogies  that  may  exist,  and  that  appear  to  suggest 
themselves  so  plainly.  In  the  commentary  on  the  narrative  we  have  engaged  in  no  polemics, 
but  have  attempted  a  positive  exposition  of  the  ideas  contained  in  it. 

Single  parts  of  Samson's  life  were  formerly  frequently  treated.  As  against  the  boundlessly 
insipid  and  wretched  views  of  the  so-called  rationalistic  exposition,  which  reached  its  acme 
in  Baur's  Biblisher  Moral,  1803,  i.  195  flf.  the  modern  mythical  apprehension  is,  to  a  certain 
extent,  a  real  advance.  But  it  is  only  by  setting  aside  the  subjective  party  opinions  of  the 
day,  and  by  adopting  a  mode  of  apprehending  the  narrative  that  shall  be  at  once  objective, 
historical,  and  congenial  to  its  contents,  that  exegesis  can  claim  to  be  scientific  or  be  capable 
of  advancing  science.  A  beautiful  elogium  of  Samson  as  compared  with  Hercules  is  found 
in  Petri  Labbe  Elogia  Sacra,  Lips.  1686,  p.  667  :  — 

"  Hercnli  cosetaneus  verus  Hercules  fuit ; 
Qute  in  illo  tabula,  in  hoc  mere  miracula." 

"  Samson's  Foxes"  are  treated  of  by  Paullini,  in  his  Philosoph.  Luststunden,  i.  147.  Essays 
on  the  jawbone  in  Lehi  are  named  below.  Schiller,  perhaps,  had  the  miracle  of  Lehi  in 
mind  in  his  ballad  Der  Biirgschaft,  verses  twelve  and  thirteen,  where  Mdros  in  answer  to 
prayer  is  delivered  from  thirst  by  water  issuing  from  the  rock.  In  the  Wiltinasage  (ed.  Per- 
in"ski6ld,  p.  272),  Sigurd,  who  has  freely  allowed  himself  to  be  bound,  at  the  right  time 
rends  all  his  cords  asunder.  Thackeray  relates  (in  his  Four  Georges,  eh.  vii.)  that  when 
George  HI.  of  England  was  blind  and  mentally  diseased,  he  nevertheless  selected  himself  the 
music  for  sacred  concerts,  and  always  from  the  Samson  of  Milton  and  Handel,  and  all  his  selec- 
tions had  reference  to  blindness,  imprisonment,  and  suffering.  There  is  a  dramatic  poem  in 
three  acts,  by  Sack,  entitled  Simson,  Zurich,  1854. 

The  narrative  in  Judg.  i.  17  is  supposed  to  be  improved  and  supplemented  in  the  work  of 
the  Leiden  Professor,  Dozy :  De  Israeliten  te  Mekka,  van  Davids  tyd  tot  in  de  vi/fde  eeuw  onser 
tudrekening,  Haarlem,  1864.  German  translation,  Leipzig,  1864.  If  any  book  can  bring  con- 
tempt and  ridicule  on  philological  and  ethnographical  investigations  and  expositions,  it  is 
this  volume.  Few  books  can  ever  have  been  written  whose  authors  presumed,  to  such  an 
extent,  and  with  such  naive  boldness,  to  substitute  subjective  arbitrariness  for  objective  tact 
and  moderation  in  the  treatment  of  history  and  language.  It  is  here  made  clear  how  little  a 
knowledge  of  Arabic  literature  implies  a  fitness  for  historical  investigation  and  conjecture.  It 
happens  unfortunately  too  often  that  some  knowledge  of  technology  imagines  itself  to  be  master 
of  art,  and  that  some  acquaintance  wit)  i  ammatical  forms  deems  itself  proficient  in  exegesis. 
Let  it  not  be  thought  that  this  judgmrn'  is  here  written  down  because  Prof.  Dozy  holds  the 
freest  views  of  the  Bible,  considers  Abi  aliam  and  Sarah  to  be  myths,  and  subscribes  to  Gei- 
cer's  opinion  that  the  Jews  falsified  Scripture.  For  Prof.  Dozy,  the  credibility  of  Scripture 
is  conditioned  by  the  necessities  of  his  hypothesis.  If  a  passage  suits  him,  it  is  by  all  means 
to  be  accepted ;  if  it  does  not  suit  him,  the  reasons  for  rejecting  it  are  at  once  apparent 
The  book,  likely  to  dazzle  and  deceive  by  reason  of  its  unequaled  audacity  and  the  splendor 
of  its  exterior,  deserves  the  severest  censure,  because  it  treads  under  foot  all  lawful  methods 
af  scientific  and  philological  research.  A  few  sentences,  having  reference  to  the  above-men- 
tioned passage  will  show  this. 

We  pass  over  h:s  identification  of  the  fact  recorded  at  Num.  xxi.  2,  3,  with  that  related  ir 


{  6.    THE  COURSE  OF  THOUGHT.  I" 

Judg.  i.  17,  for  therein  he  follows  others.  But  he  thinks  that  the  reading  of  the  Syriac  and 
Arabic  versions,  "  Simeon  went  with  Judah  his  brother,"  is  better  than  that  of  the  Hebrew 
text  (which  the  Sept.  has  also),  "  Judah  went  with  Simeon  his  brother."  The  Hebrew  text 
he  thinks,  was  altered  by  the  Jewish  doctors,  "  who  begrudged  Simeon  the  first  role  "  Now, 
the  matter  stands  thus :  In  ver.  3  Judah  invites  Simeon  to  assist  him  to  subjugate  the  terri- 
tory allotted  to  him,  promising  that  he  will  afterwards  help  him  (Simeon)  to  take  possession 
of  his  also.  Simeon  consents,  "  and,"  says  the  writer,  "  Simeon  went  with  him  (Judah). 
Simeon  therefore  stands  first  in  this  instance,  and  yet  the  envy  of  the  Jews  did  not  alter  the 
clause.  When  the  turn  came  to  Simeon's  territory,  to  which  Zephath  belongs,  Judah  ren- 
dered assistance  to  Simeon ;  consequently  ver.  17  says,  "  and  Judah  went  with  Simeon."  If 
rank  comes  into  consideration  at  all  in  this  expression,  it  belongs  to  the  second  named,  to 
whom  he  who  goes  with  him  merely  renders  assistance.  If  the  Peshito  reversed  the  order 
in  ver.  17,  it  was  only  to  bring  about  a  verbal  agreement  with  ver.  3  b. 

Simeon  and  Judah  had  smitten  the  Canaanites  in  Zephath,  inflicted  the  ban  upon  them, 
and  given  to  Zephath  the  name  Hormah  (prop.  Chormah)  from  cherem,  cf.  below  on  ch. 
a.  17.  Now  this  putting  under  the  ban  was  not  anything  peculiar  to  these  two  tribes. 
Moses  had  done  it  in  behalf  of  all  Israel  (Num.  xxi.  3).  Its  infliction  throughout  the  con- 
quest was  expressly  enjoined,  Deut.  vii.  2.  Joshua  executed  it  in  Jericho,  in  Ai,  and  every- 
where else  (cf.  Josh.  vi.  17,  vii.  10,  etc.).  But  Dozy  finds  in  the  ban  (cherem)  something 
peculiar  to  the  tribe  of  Simeon ;  and  combining  this  assumption  with  the  narrative  in  1 
Chron.  iv.  24-43,  where  (ver.  41)  we  read  of  a  ban  executed  by  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  he 
arrives  at  the  following  conclusion  :  "  Since  the  sons  of  Simeon  made  and  inflicted  the  ban 
(:!!i,'"irpi),  it  follows  that  they  made  a  herem."  The  place  therefore  "  was  called  Herem  or 
Hormah."  But  what  place  in  Arabia  —  for  that  the  place  was  in  Arabia  similar  reasonings 
have  previously  proved  —  could  be  called  Herem  but  Mecca !  For  Herem  means  also  a 
"  place  consecrated  to  God,"  and  Mecca  is  called  Haram,  which  is  equivalent  to  Herem. 
Therefore,  the  battle  of  the  sons  of  Simeon  took  place  in  Mecca  ;  and  even  the  name  Mecca 
dates  from  it ;  for  maka  raba  signifies  a  great  defeat,  to  wit,  that  which  the  enemy  there  suf- 
fered at  the  hands  of  Simeon.  The  Simeonites  came  to  the  entrance  of  Gedor,  on  the  east 
side  of  the  valley  (1  Chron.  iv.  39).  Now,  of  course,  the  walls  of  the  old  temple  in  Mecca 
were  called  al  gadr  (al  gidar  =:  the  wall)  ;  consequently,  Gedor  is  to  be  read  Geder,  and 
signifies  the  temple  in  Mecca,  to  which  they  came.  It  must,  however,  be  read  Geder  Baal, 
although  the  second  word  be  wanting ;  for  2  Chron.  xxvi.  7  speaks  of  Arabians  who  dwelt 
in  Gur  Baal,  and  Gur  is  to  be  read  Geder.  The  LXX.  at  this  place  speaks  of  Arabians 
dwelling  M  ttjs  ire'row.  Common  sense  would  think  of  Petra ;  but  Dozy  knows  that  they 
mean  the  black  stone  in  Mecca,  etc. 

Dozy  says  at  the  beginning,  that  exegesis  requires  so  much  learning  only  because  it  deals 
with  "  Hebrew  books."  Unquestionably  1  for  where  but  in  Hebrew  exegesis  would  one  dare 
to  be  guilty  of  such  scientific  folly  I  Had  one  ventured  to  do  this  in  the  domain  of  classical 
philology,  he  would  have  experienced  the  fate  with  which  the  philosophers  menaced  Homer 
when  they  threatened  to  drive  him  from  the  stadium  with  scourges. 

All  science  becomes  impossible,  when  credible  objective  tradition  is  made  the  plaything 
of  subjective  caprice.  We  cannot  here  enter  farther  into  details  ;  these  must  be  left  for  other 
places.  For  those  who  know,  it  is  enough  to  say,  that  if  such  arguments  are  valid,  the  next 
thing  will  be,  instead  of  the  Israelites  in  Mecca,  a  book  on  "  the  Meccans  in  Zion." 

Science,  too,  needs  to  experience  the  promise  written  in  Ezek.  xxxix.  29. 

§  6.      The   Course  of  Thought} 

The  Book  derives  its  name  from  the  Judges  whom  God  raised  up  to  guide  and  dehvei 
Israel.  It  begins,  therefore,  by  depicting  the  sins  and  consequent  sufferings  into  which  Israel 
fell  after  the  death  of  Joshua,  and  which  rendered  the  judgeship  necessary. 

fl  The  following  paragraphs  were  written  by  the  author  as  ff  Preliminary  Observations  "  to  the  "  Homiletical  Hints," 
which  he  gives  in  a  body  at  the  close  of  the  commentary,  and  not,  as  in  the  other  volumes  of  this  work,  after  the  several 
sections  to  which  they  refer.  It  was  thought  advisable  in  translating  the  "Jook  to  alter  this  arrangement  and  make  it 
conform  to  that  observed  in  other  parts  of  the  general  work.  The  more  detailed  analysis  of  the  contents,  as  also  tin 
formal  division  of  the  work  itself  into  parts  and  sections,  together  with  the  resumes  placed  at  the  head  of  each  division 
throughout  the  work,  have  been  added  by  the  translator,  guided  for  the  most  part  by  hints,  and  largely  even  in  the  lan- 
guage of  the  author  himself.  It  is  proper  to  add  that  these  are  the  only  additions  that  have  not  been  inclosed  in  brafkftt* 
-Tr.] 


20  THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 

After  this  introduction  follows  the  main  body  of  the  work,  which  treats  of  the  history  of 
Israel  under  the  Judges  themselves.  The  raising  up  of  the  successive  heroes  exhibits  with 
ever-growing  lustre  the  gracious  guidance  of  God,  revealing  itself  more  and  more  wonderfully 
as  the  distress  into  which  Israel  falls  becomes  more  pressing.  The  selection  of  the  several 
judges  and  heroes  forms  a  climax  of  divine  wonders,  in  which  the  multiformity  of  Jehovah's 
saving  resources  shows  itself  in  contrast  with  the  monotonousness  of  Israel's  sins,  and  the 
workings  of  His  grace  in  the  hidden  and  obscure  in  opposition  to  that  pride  of  the  people  in 
which  their  falls  originated.  The  histories  of  the  Judges,  especially  those  of  Othniel,  Ehud, 
Deborah  and  Barak,  Gideon,  Jephthah,  and  Samson,  through  whom  and  their  adherents  the 
great  and  merciful  deeds  of  God  do  show  themselves  in  ever-increasing  fullness,  form  the  sec- 
tions into  which  the  Book  may  be  divided.  From  Othniel  to  Samson,  under  whom  the  his- 
tory returns  to  the  tribe  of  Judah  from  which  it  started,  every  Judge  illustrates  a  new  side 
of  God's  wonderful  assistance.  This  manifoldness  characterizes  the  judgeship.  It  rests  on 
no  tradition.  The  changes  of  the  persons  and  tribes  entrusted  with  its  functions,  interrupt 
its  efficacy.  The  narrative  gradually  indicates  the  want  of  unity,  despite  the  abundance  of 
strength.  Hence  that  which  peculiarly  characterizes  the  judgeship,  marks  at  the  same  time 
its  imperfection.  For  even  times  of  peace  admitted  of  such  occurrences  as  those  which  fil. 
the  closing  part  of  the  Book,  after  the  record  of  Samson's  death. 

In  the  closing  part  of  the  Book,  the  decay  of  the  priesthood,  the  arbitrariness  of  individ- 
uals, and  the  abominations  of  licentiousness,  passion,  and  discord,  are  traced  back  to  the  want 
of  a  settled,  permanent  government.  The  close  of  the  Book  of  Judges  forms  an  introduction 
to  the  Books  of  Kings. 

The  following  analysis  indicates  a  little  more  in  detail  the  course  of  the  narrative  ai 
sketched  above  :  — 

Part  First. 

Introductory  delineation  of  the  condition  of  Israel  after  the  death  of  Joshua ;  sin,  and  the 
judgments  entailed  by  it,  rendering  the  judgeship  necessary.      Chaps,  i.-iii.  4. 

1st  Section.  The  relations  of  Israel  towards  the  remaining  Canaanites,  as  forming  the  back- 
ground of  the  ensuing  history.  Believing  and  obedient  Israel  enjoys  divine  direction  and 
favor,  is  united  within  and  victorious  without ;  but  faithlessness  and  disobedience  lay  the  foun- 
dations of  apostasy  and  servitude.      Ch.  i. 

2d  Section.  The  religious  degeneracy  of  Israel  which  resulted  from  its  disobedient  conduct 
with  respect  to  the  Canaanites,  and  the  severe  discipline  which  it  rendered  necessary,  as 
explaining  the  alternations  of  apostasy  and  servitude,  repentance  and  deliverance,  character- 
istic of  the  period  of  the  Judges.     Chaps,  ii.-iii.  4. 

Part  Secojtd. 

The  history  of  Israel  under  the  Judges :  a  history  of  sin,  ever  repeating  itself,  and  of  divine 
grace,  constantly  devising  new  means  of  deliverance.  Meanwhile,  however,  the  imperfections 
of  the  judicial  institute  display  themselves,  and  prepare  the  way  for  the  appointment  of  a 
king.      Chaps,  iii.  5.-xvi. 

Xst  Section.  The  servitude  to  Chushan  Rishathaim,  King  of  Mesopotamia.  Othniel,  the 
Judge  of  blameless  and  happy  life.      Ch.  iii.  6—11. 

2d  Section.  The  servitude  to  Eglon,  King  of  Moab.  Ehud,  the  Judge  with  the  double- 
edced  dagger.      Shamgar,  the  deliverer  with  the  ox-goad.      Ch.  iii.  12-31. 

3d  Section.  The  servitude  to  Jabin,  King  of  Canaan.  Deborah,  the  female  Judge  of  fiery 
spirit,  and  Barak,  the  military  hero.      Chaps,  iv.,  v. 

4th  Section.  The  incursions  and  oppressions  of  the  Midianites.  Gideon,  the  Judge  who 
refuses  to  be  king.      Chaps,  vi.-viii. 

5th   Section.    The  usurped  rule  of  Abimelech,  the  fratricide  and  thorn-bush  king.      Ch.  ix. 

6th  Section.  Two  Judges  in  quiet,  peaceful  times  :  Tolah  of  Issachar,  and  Jair  the  Gileadite. 
Ch.  x.  1-6. 

7th  Section.  The  oppression  of  the  Midianites.  Jephthah,  the  Judge  of  the  vow.  Chaps, 
x.  6-xii.  7. 

Sth  Section.  Three  Judges  of  uneventful  lives  in  peaceful  times :  Ibzan  of  Bethlehem,  Elon 
.he  Zebulonite,  and  Abdon  the  Pirathonite.      Ch.  xii.  8-15. 

9th  Section  The  oppression  of  the  Philistines.  Samson  the  Nazarite  Judge.  Chaps. 
»iii.-xvi. 


§  6.     THE  COURSE  OF    THOUGHT.  21 

Part  Third. 

The  conclusion  of  the  Book,  tracing  the  evils  of  the  period,  the  decay  of  the  priesthood, 
the  self-will  of  individuals,  and  the  prevalence  of  licentiousness,  passion,  and  discord,  to  the 
absence  of  a  fixed  and  permanent  form  of  government.      Chaps,  xvii.-xxi. 

1st  Section.  The  history  of  Micah's  private  temple  and  image-worship  :  showing  the 
individual  arbitrariness  of  the  times,  and  its  tendency  to  subvert  and  corrupt  the  religious 
institutions  of  Israel.      Chaps,  xvii.,  xviii. 

2d  Section.  The  story  of  the  infamous  deed  perpetrated  at  Gibeah,  and  its  terrible  conse- 
quences :  another  illustration  of  the  evils  that  result  when  "  every  man  does  what  is  good 
in  his  own  eyes."     Chaps,  xix.-xxi 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


PAKT  FIRST. 


Introductory  Delineation  of  the  Condition  of  Israel  after  the  Death  of  Joshua ; 
Sin,  and  the  Judgments  entailed  by  it,  rendering  the  Judgeship  necessary. 


FIRST  SECTION. 


THE  RELATIONS  OF  ISRAEL  TOWARDS  THE  REMAINING  CANAANITES  A3  FORMING  THE  BACK- 
GROUND OF  THE  ENSUING  HISTORY.  BELIEVING  AND  OBEDIENT  ISRAEL  ENJ0T8  DIVINE  DI- 
RECTION AND  FAVOR,  IS  UNITED  WITHIN  AND  VICTORIOUS  WITHOUT  J  BUT  FAITHLESSNESS  AJJD 
DISOBEDIENCE    LAT    THE    FOUNDATIONS   OF   APOSTASY    AND    SERVITUDE. 


"  Who  shall  first  go  up  against  the   Canaanite  f n 

Chapter  I.  1,  2. 

Now  [And]  after  the  death  of  Joshua  it  came  to  pass,  that  the  children  [sons]  of 
Israel   asked  the    Lord   [Jehovah].1  saying,  Who  shall  go  up  for  us2  against8   the 
2   Oanaanites    first  to  fight    against  them  ?      And  the    Lord    [Jehovah]  said,    Judah 
»hall  go  up :  behold,4  I  have  delivered  the  land  into  his  hand. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL 

[a  Ver.  1.  —  Tne  author  renders  :  "  the  sons  of  Israel  asked  God  ;  n  and  by  way  of  explanation  adds  the  following  note  : 
"  Thus  do  we  intend  constantly  to  render  i""Pn\  on  the  ground  that  it  expresses  the  absolute  idea  of  the  true  God  in 

Israel.  Since  QTwN  is  also  used  in  connection  with  heathen  worship,  it  corresponds  to  our  (  Godhead,  Deity  '  or 
1  the  Gods.'  "     In  this  translation  the  word  Jehovah  will  be  inserted.  — Ta.] 

[2  Ver.  1.  —  :)3*'"n73?'>",,E.  Dr.  Cassel  takes  ?0  /  in  a  partitive  sense,  and  translates,  "who  of  us  shall  go  up." 
It  is  more  properly  regarded  as  dot.  commodi ;  for,  (1.)  The  partitive  relation,  though  sometimes  indicated  by  ^(ap- 
parently however,  only  after  numerals,  cf.  Ges.  Lex.  s.  v.  ,4  b},  would  be  more  properly  expressed  by  2  or  7^3  . 
and  (2.>  \\  the  writer  had  intended  to  connect  ITJ^  with  N^3,  he  would  not  have  placed  the  verb  between  them,  cl. 
Is.  xlviii.  14,  j  aug.  xxi.  8.  As  it  stands,  the  expression  is  a  perfect  grammatical  parallel  with  Is.  vi.  8:  ^13  v"7f ^""'O 
Moreover.  ^3"^,  in  the  sense  of   ^133  or    ^137373,  adds  nothing  which  is  not  already  implied  in  the  words,  n?^**    SD 

n*  r"Ti713,  r  ffho  shall  first  go  up."  On  the  other  hand,  taken  in  its  natural  sense,  as  indirect  object  after  the  verb,  it 
expresses  the  thou^ut,  that  whoever  "goes  first,''  makes  a  beginning,  will  do  it  for  the  advantage  of  all.  VFhat  that 
advantage  was,  may  i^.  seen  from  our  author's  exposition  of  the  inquiry.  —  Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  1.  —  7S,  properly,   towards.     Dr.  Cassel  has  gegen,  which   means  both  "  towards  n  and  (f  against."     The 

-*me  preposition  occurs  in  vers.  10, 11 ;  and  though  translated  "against,''  is  not  to  be  taken  in  the  sense  of    ,  V.      Th» 


24 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


hostile  intent  in  these  passages  is  not  expressed  by    "  S,  but  appears  from  the  context.     In  this  Terse,  attention  to  thi 
proper  meaning  of    vS.  does  away  with  the  appearance  of  tautology  which   in  English  the  inquiry  presents  —  Te.] 
[*  Ver.  2.  —  Dr.  Cassel :  "  Wofdan  !    Up  then  !  "  On  this  rendering  of  HSn,  cf.  the  foot-note  on  p.  26-  —  Ta.] 


EXEGETTHAL  AXD  DOCTRINAL. 

Vcr.  1 .  And  after  the  death  of  Joshua  it  came 
to  pass.  This  commencement  corresponds  entirely 
with  that  of  Joshua,  ch.  i.  1  :  "  and  after  the  death 
of  Moses,  the  servant  of  Jehovah,  it  came  to  pass." 
On  account  of  this  correspondence  the  usual  ad- 
dition, "  the  son  of  Nun,"  but  also  the  designation 
"  servant  of  Jehovah. "elsewhere  applied  to  Joshua 
(Josh.  xxiv.  29  ;  Judg.  ii  8),  is  omitted.  A  simi- 
lar correspondence  exists  between  Josh.  xxiv.  29, 
and  Deut.  xxxiv.  5.  Wherever  Joshua  is  com- 
pared with  Moses,  care  is  taken  to  indicate  at  the 
same  time  the  important  difference  between  them. 
Joshua  also  is  a  "  servant  of  Jehovah,"  but  not  in 
the  same  high  sense  as  his  master.  Joshua  also 
died,  but  not  like  Moses  "  through  the  mouth  of 

Jehovah"  (HirP  ^5" 75?).  Moses  was  clothed 
with  the  authority  of  origination  and  establishment. 
He  had  been  the  Father  (cf.  Num.  xi.  12),  the 
Priest  (Ex.  xxiv.  8),  the  sole  Regent  (Num.  xvi. 
13),  and  Judge  (Ex.  xviii.  16),  of  his  tribes.  He 
transferred  the  priesthood  from  Himself  to  Aaron 
(Ex.  xxviii.  1)  ;  he  selected  those  who  assisted 
him  in  deciding  minor  lawsuits  (Ex.  xviiL  21  ; 
Num.  xi.  17).  He  took  seventy  men  of  the  "el- 
ders of  the  people,"  to  bear  with  him  the  burden 
of  governing  the  tribes  (Num.  xi.  16)  ;  he  imparted 
of  his  own  honor  to  Joshua,  that  the  congregation 

1  If  in  Ex.  vi.  20,  26,  the  order  is  "  Aaron  and  Moses,"  it 
*  only  to  indicate  Aaron  as  the  first-born ;  hence,  ver.  27  of 
the  same  chapter,  as  if  by  way  of  correction,  says.  ft  these 
are  that  Moses  and  Aaron."'  For  the  same  reason  Num.  in. 
1  reads  :  "  These  are  the  generations  of  Aaron  and  Moses.'* 
As  the  order  is  everywhere  Moses  and  Aaron,  so  it  is  nat- 
urally also  :f  Moses  and  Eleazar."  This  difference  in  the 
relations  of  Moses  and  Joshua  respectively  to  the  Priest,  it 
is  important  to  notice.  For  it  is  of  itself  sufficient  to  show 
the  un'enableness  of  Bertheau's  assertion  (Buck  der  Rieh- 
tert  p.  9),  that  Num.  xxvii.  21  is  to  be  so  taken  that  Joshua 
is  to  ask,  not  before,  but  for,  instead  of,  Eleazar,  whether  he 
shall  go  out :  that  is  (as  he  thinks),  tf  in  a  manner  just  as 
valid  as  if  the  high-priest  had  inquired  of  Jehovah."  To  in- 
quire of  God  by  meant  of  the  Urim,  the  Priest  alone  could 
do,  for  he  alone  had  it.  Moses  and  the  prophets  received 
revelations  immediately  ;  but  when  the  Urim  is  mentioned, 
the  Priest  is  the  only  possible  medium.  The  passages  to 
which  Bertheau  refers,  speak  against  his  assertion.  The 
LXX.  are  as  plain  as  the  Hebrew  text.  In  1  Sam.  xxii.  10, 
it  is  the  Priest  who  inquires  of  God  for  David.  Josephus, 
Ant.  iv.  7,  2,  is  an  irrelevant  passage,  and  therefore  cannot 
*e  cited  at  all.  Moreover,  Josephus  himself  puts  Eleazar 
before  Joshua,  when  he  speaks  of  both  riv.  7,  3).  Nor  is 
there  any  good  ground  for  doubt  as  to  the  clearness  of  the 
passage  in  Num.  xxvii.  If  we  find  no  mention  anywhere 
of  Joshua's  having  inquired  by  Urim,  the  foundation  of  this 
fact  is  deeply  laid  in  his  relations  to  Moses.  He  was  called 
only  to  be  the  executor  of  the  designs  of  Moses.  His  ac- 
tivity expends  itself  in  continuing  the  work  of  Moses.  It 
moves  entirely  within  the  lines  prescribed  by  Moses,  and  is 
Unpelled  by  his  inviolable  authority.  Joshua's  deeds  are 
but  the  historical  outgrowth  of  the  spirit  of  Moses.  The 
Book  of  Joshua  is  but  the  narrative  of  Joshua's  obedience 
*o  the  word  of  Moses.  Whatever  Joshua  ordains,  is  ren- 
dered Atcred  by  an  appeal  to  Moses.  Even  the  division  of 
the  land  is  ennducted  according  to  this  authority  (Josh. 
xiii.-xv  ).  "Every  place  have  I  given  you,  as  I  said  unto 
Moses,"  is  the  language  used  (Josh  i.  3).  Remember  what 
Moses  commanded  you,  says  Joshua  to  the  tribes  of  Reuben, 
1%&,  and   Manasseh  (Josh    i    13).     The  fact  is  brought  out 


of  Israel  might  obey  him  (Num.  xxvii.  20.)  With 
the  death  of  Moses  the  work  of  legislation  is  closed. 
After  him,  Joshua  exercises  the  authority  of 
government  and  direction.  By  his  deeds  he  gains  for 
himself  respect  among  the  people,  like  that  which 
Moses  had  (Josh.  i.  5,  i.  17,  iv.  14,  xvii.  4,  xviii.  3) ; 
similar  wonders  are  wrought  through  him :  but  he 
executes  only  inherited  commands  ;  his  task  de- 
mands the  energy  of  obedience.  Moses  had  always 
been  named  before  Aaron  (Moses  and  Aaron)  j1 
but  when  Joshua  and  the  Priest  were  named  to- 
gether, Eleazar  stood  first.  (Thus,  Num.  xxxiv. 
17  ;  Josh.  xiv.  1,  xvii.  4,  xix.  51,  xxi.  1).  When 
Moses  lived,  the  priesthood  received  their  com- 
mands through  him ;  after  his  death,  Joshua  re- 
ceived support  and  aid  through  the  Priest  (Num. 
xxvii.  21).  In  accordance  with  this,  we  must  un- 
derstand what  is  said,  Josh.  i.  1,  namely,  that 
"  the  Lord  spake  unto  Joshua."  For  henceforth 
"  there  arose  not  a  prophet  like  unto  Moses." 
That  which  Moses  was,  could  not  repeat  itself  in 
any  other  person.  Joshua,  therefore,  was  only  the 
reflection  of  a  part  of  the  power  of  Moses  ;  but  as 
such  he  had  conducted  the  first  historical  act  of 
fulfillment  demanded  by  the  Mosaic  law.  The 
conquest  of  Canaan  was  the  necessary  presupposi- 
tion of  the  Mosaic  system.  Israel,  having  been 
liberated,  received  a  national  homestead.  When 
Joshua  died,  the  division  of  the  land  among  the 
tribes  was  completed.     With  the  death  of  Moses 

with  peculiar  emphasis  in  the  following  passages:  "  B« 
strong  and  very  courageous  to  do  according  to  all  the  laws 
which  Moses  my  servant  commanded  thee  :  turn  not  from  it 
to  the  right  hand  or  the  left"  (Josh.  i.  7).  "There  was  not 
a  word  of  all  that  Moses  commanded  which  Joshua  read  not 
before  all  the  congregation  of  Israel''  (Josh.  viii.  35).  "As 
the  Lord  commanded  Moses  his  servant,  so  did  Moses  com- 
mand Joshua,  and  so  did  Joshua  ;  he  left  nothing  undone 
of  all  that  the  Lord  commanded  Moses  "  (Josh.  xi.  15). 

Wherever,  therefore,  Joshua  simply  executes  the  will  of 
God  as  expressed  in  the  commands  of  Moses,  the  necessity 
for  inquiring  by  Urim  does  not  arise.  It  is  precisely  in  this 
execution  of  the  Mosaic  commands  that  God  speaks  to  Joshua, 
as  Josh  iv.  10  clearly  teaches  ;  K  until  everything  was 
finished  that  the  Lord  commanded  Joshua  to  speak,  accord- 
ing to  all  that  Moses  commanded  Joshua."  The  direct 
command  of  God  to  Moses  operates  on  Joshua  who  exe- 
cutes it. 

That  Joshua  is  the  executor  of  the  commands  of  Moses, 
cannot  consistently  with  the  spirit  of  the  book  which  re 
lates  his  history,  be  overlooked.  When,  however,  the  do* 
cision  by  Urim  is  alluded  to,  and  it  is  said,  "  according  to  his 

mouth  "  (V2  73?),  the  reference  is  to  the  same  (priestly) 
mouth  which,  Josh.  xix.  50.  assigns  an  inheritance  to 
Joshua,     "  according    to    the    mouth  of    Jehovah '•     (  v37 

(""Pi"^  ^2).  This  method  of  decision  comes  into  play  when 
Joshua  has  no  instructions  from  Moses  according  to  which 
to  act.  The  peculiar  position  of  Joshua,  by  whom,  through 
the  word  of  Moses,  God  still  always  speaks  and  acts  as 
through  Moses  (Josh.  iii.  7),  and  who  nevertheless  does  not 
like  Moses  stand  before,  but  after,  the  priest,  becomes  every- 
where manifest.  This  position  also  is  unique,  and  nevei 
again  recurs.  It  is  therefore  at  his  death,  and  not  till  then, 
that  the  preponderance  of  the  Priest  as  the  sole  possessor  of 
the  word  of  God,  becomes  fully  manifest.  The  fact,  there- 
fore, that  we  now  firsc  hear  of  an  "  asking  of  the  Lord,"  so 
far  from  being  obscure,  Is  full  of  instru'tion  on  the  histor- 
ical position  of  affairs- 


CHAPTER  I.   1,8. 


25 


the  spirit  revealed  in  the  law  enters  upon  its  course 
through  the  history  of  the  world.  With  the  de- 
parture of  Joshua,  the  national  development  of 
Israel  in  Canaan  commences.  The  position  of 
Moses  was  unique,  and  like  that  of  a  father,  could 
not  be  refilled.  When  he  dies,  the  heir  assumes 
the  house  and  its  management.  This  heir  was  not 
Joshua,  but  the  people  itself.  Joshua  was  only 
a  temporary  continuator  of  the  Mosaic  authority, 
specially  charged  with  the  seizure  of  the  land. 
He  was  but  the  executive  arm  of  Moses  for  the 

conquest  {i"PI£J?,  "  minister,"  Josh.  i.  1 ).  His  per- 
sonality is  inseparable  from  that  of  Moses.  As 
Elijah's  spirit  does  not  wholly  depart  from  the  na- 
tion until  Elisha's  death,  so  the  personal  conduct- 
and  guidance  of  the  people  by  Moses  do  not  en- 
tirely cease  until  the  death  of  Joshua.  Joshua's 
activity  is  just  as  unique  as  that  of  his  teacher.  He 
is  no  lawgiver,  but  neither  is  he  a  king  or  judge, 
as  were  others  who  came  after  him.  He  is  the 
servant  of  Jehovah,  inasmuch  as  he  is  the  minis- 
ter of  Moses.  The  correspondence  between  Judg. 
i.  1  and  Josh.  i.  1,  is  therefore  a  very  profound 
one.  The  death  of  the  men,  which  these  verses 
respectively  record,  gave  rise  to  the  occurrences  that 
follow. 

The  sons  of  Israel  asked  Jehovah.    Literally  : 
"  And  it  came  to  pass  ....  and  the  sons  of  Israel 

asked,"  etc.  The  first  "  and  "  (1)  introduces  the 
cause,1  the  second  the  consequence.  It  is  moreover 
intimated  that  the  consequence  is  speedy  in  coming, 
follows  its  cause  without  any  interval.  The  trans- 
lation might  have  been :  "  And  it  came  to  pass 
....  that  the  sons  of  Israel  immediately  asked  ;  " 
or,  "  Scarcely  had  Joshua  died,  when  the  sons  of 
Israel,"  etc.  It  lies  in  the  nature  of  the  Hebrew 
copula,  that  when  it  introduces  a  consequence,  it 
also  marks  it  as  closely  connected  with  its  antece- 
dent in  point  of  time.  The  Greeks  and  Romans 
made  similar  use  of  koX  and  et.  Cf.  the  line  of  Vir- 
gil {s-Eneid,  iii.  9)  :.  Vix  prima  inceperat  o?$tas,  et 
paler  Anchises  darefatis  vela  jubebat.  The  Hebrew 
idiom  has  also  passed  over  into  the  Greek  of  the 
New  Testament,  ef.  Luke  ii.  21  ;  not  ore  eVAVjs- 
O-naav  Tj/xepal  oktw  ....  Kal  €K\7]8r],  etc.  : 
"  and  the  child  was  eight  days  old,  when  forthwith 
it  was  named  Jesus,"  where  the  Gothic  version  like- 
wise retains  the  double  yah, "  and."  This  brings  out 
the  more  definite  sense,  both  in  the  parallel  passage. 
Josh.  i.  1,  and  here.  Scarcely  had  Moses  died,  is 
the  idea  there,  when  God  spake  to  Joshua.  The 
government  of  Israel  was  not  for  a  moment  to  be 
interrupted.  Scarcely  was  Joshua  dead,  when  the 
sons  of  Israel  asked  Jehovah.  As  Joshua  suc- 
ceeded Moses  in  the  chief  direction  of  affairs,  so  the 
congregation  of  the  children  of  Israel  succeeded 
Joshua.  The  representatives  of  this  congregation, 
as  appears  from  Josh.  xxiv.  31  and  Judg.  ii.  7,  are 

the  Elders  (C"'2~T).  Jewish  tradition,  accordingly, 
makes  the  spiritual  doctrine  pass  from  Moses  to 
Joshua,  and  from  Joshua  to  the  Elders.   These  El- 

1  [Bertheau  :  "  ^Tl^T  in  conjunction  with  the  words, 
'  after  the  death  of  Joshua,'  first  connects  itself  with  the 
'losing  narrative  of  the  Book  of  Joshua  (xxiv.  29-33),  and 
Ib^ondly  designates  the  Book  of  Judges  as  a  link  in  the  chain 
ol  books  which  relate,  in  unbroken  connection,  the  [sacred] 
history  of  the  world,  from  the  creation  to  the  exile  of  the 
nhabitants  of  the  southern  kingdom.  The  several  books 
Jrhieh  contain  this  connected  historical  account  are  joined 

together  by  the  connective    i."  —  Tr.] 

2  Cf.  Josephus,  Ant.  jv.  8,14,  who  states  on  the  authority 


ders  are  the  seventy  men  chosen  by  Moses  (Num. 
xi.  16)  to  assist  him  in  bearing  the  burden  of  the 
people.  The  term  "  Elder,"  it  is  true,  is  applied  to 
every  authority  among  the  people,  especially  civil. 
"  Elders,"  as  representatives  of  the  people,  are  wit- 
nesses of  the  wonders  of  God  in  the  desert  (Ex.  xvii. 
5).  The  "  Elders  "  are  judges-  (Deut.  xxii.  16) ;  thp 
civil  authorities  of  each  city  are  "Elders"  (Deut 
xxv.  7).  "  Seventy  of  the  Elders,"  with  Moses  ami 
the  priests,  behold  the  glory  of  God  (Ex.  xxiv.  1 

seq.).  The  C^ptP,  shoterim,  officers  charged  with 
executive  and  police  duties,  become  "  Elders  "  as 
soon  as  they  execute  the  regulations  of  Moses 
among  the  people  (Ex.  xii.  21 ).  The  seventy  Elders 
who  assisted  Moses  in  bearing  the  burden  that 
pressed  upon  him  must,  therefore,  be  distinguished 
from  the  authorities  of  the  several  tribes  and  cities. 
They  represent  the  whole  nation.  As  such,  they 
unite  with  Moses,  at  the  close  of  his  career,  in  com- 
manding the  people  to  keep  the  law,  andafter  pass- 
ing the  Jordan  to  erect  a  memorial  of  great  stones 
(Deut.  xxvii.  1,2).  During  the  regency  of  Joshua, 
the  authorities  and  representatives  of  the  people, 
beside  the  priests  and  Levites,  consist  of  Elders, 
heads  of  tribes,  judges,  and  magistrates  (shoterim). 
Such  is  the  enumeration  after  the  conquest  of  Ai, 
and  particularly  in  Josh,  xxiii.  2,  where,  in  order  to 
give  his  last  instructions  to  Israel,  Joshua  calls  all 
the  representatives  of  the  people  together.  Again, 
in  eh.  xxiv.  1,  it  is  stated  that  Joshua  "  called  for 
the  Elders  of  Israel,  and  for  their  heads,  judges,  and 
magistrates."  If  no  distinction  were  intended  here, 
it  had  been  sufficient  to  say,  "elders  and  heads  ;  " 
for  judges  and  magistrates  were  also  "  elders." 
But  he  called  together  the  national  representatives 
and  those  of  the  several  tribes,  like  two  "  Houses  " 
or  "  Chambers."  The  tribal  representatives  and 
authorities  he  dismisses;  but  the  "Elders,"  who 
belong  to  all  the  tribes  in  common,  remain  near 
him,  as  they  had  been  near  Moses.  These,  there- 
fore are  they  who,  when  Joshua  dies,  step  into  his 
place.  As  on  him,  so  on  them,  there  had  been  put 
of  the  spirit  that  was  on  Moses  (Num.  xi.  17).  They 
quickly  and  zealously  undertake  the  government. 
They  determine  to  begin  at  once  where  Joshua 
stopped,  to  make  war  on  the  nations  who  have  not 
yet  been  conquered,  though  their  lands  have  been 
assigned  to  the  several  tribes  (Josh,  xxiii.  4) 
Joshua  is  scarcely  dead,  before  the  Elders  inquire  of 
God.8 

No  father  ever  cared  for  his  children  as  Moses, 
under  divine  direction,  cared  for  his  people.  Who, 
then,  when  he  is  gone,  shall  determine  what  the 
people  are  or  are  not  to  undertake  !  The  answer 
to  this  question  is  recorded  Num.  xxvii.  21  :  After 
the  death  of  Moses,  Joshua  is  to  stand  before  Elea- 
zar  the  priest,  inquire  of  him  after  the  judgment  of 
Urim  from  Jehovah,  and  according  to  his  answei 
they  shall  go  out  and  come  in.  That  Joshua  ever 
did  this,  the  book  which  bears  his  name  nowhere 
records.  It  is  characteristic  of  his  exceptional  pcsi- 
tion.  as  bound  by  the  word  and  directions  of  Moses, 

of  Jewish  tradition  that  there  were  in  every  city  seven  judges, 
each  with  two  Levitical  assistants,  corresponding  to  the 
seveuty-two  of  the  general  senate. 

3  [Bachmajw  :  "  The  sons  of  Israel  here  are  not  the  whole 
nation,  but  only  the  tribes  west  of  the  Jordan,  who  ar*( 
spoken  of  in  the  same  way,  and  in  express  contradistinction 
from  the  tribes  east  of  the  Jordan,  in  Josh.  xxii.  12,  13,  32. 
According  to  Josh.  xiii.  and  xxiii.  the  further  conflict  with 
the  Canaanites  was  incumbent  on  the  western,  not  on  the 
eastern  tribes.  Hence,  also,  the  following  account  treats  on]} 
of  the  doings  and  omissions  of  the  western  Israel  '        Tb1 


26 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


that  the  word  of  God  comes  directly  to  him,  al- 
though he  ranks  after  Eleazar  the  priest.  But  this 
is  not  the  position  of  the  congregation  of  Israel ; 
and  hence  the  provision  made  by  Moses  for  Joshua 
now  formally  becomes  of  force.     For  the  first  time 

since  Num.  xxvii.  21,  we  find  here  the  word  '^27 
with  2,  in  the  signification  "  to  inquire  of  Jeho- 
vah ; "  for  the  C^-ISS    /SK?  of  that  passage  and 

the  n'jn,3  7St£7  of  this  are  equivalent  expres- 
sions. Inquiries  put  to  the  Urim  and  Thummim 
were  answered  by  none  but  God.  In  the  sublime 
organism  of  the  Mosaic  law  every  internal  thought, 
every  spiritual  truth,  presents  itself  in  the  form  of 
an  external  action,  a  visible  symbol.  Urim  and 
Thummim  (Light  and  Purity)  lie  in  the  breast-plate 
on  the  heart  of  the  priest,  when  he  enters  into  the 
sanctuary  (Ex.  xxviii.  30).  They  lie  on  the  heart ; 
but  that  which  is  inquired  after,  receives  its  solution 
from  the  Spirit  of  God  in  the  heart  of  the  priest. 
Consequently,  although  in  the  locus  classicus  (Num. 
xxvii.  21),  the  expression  is,  "to  inquire  of  the 
Urim,"  here  and  elsewhere  in  the  Book  of  Judges 
it  is  always,  "  and  they  inquired  of  Jehovah."  The 
Greeks  also  used  the  expression  eparav  tov  OeoV  for 
"inquiring  of  the  oracle,"  cf.  Xenoph.,  Mem.,  viii. 
3).  The  Urim  also  were  an  oracle,  and  a  priest 
announced  the  word  of  God.  The  God  of  Israel, 
hoivever,  does  not  speak  in  riddles  (Num.  xii.  8), 
bu'  in  clear  and  definite  responses.  Israel  asks  :  — 
Who  of  ua '  shall  first  go  up  against  the  Ca- 
naanite  to  fight  against  him  ?  The  word  "  go 
up  "  is  not  to  be  taken  altogether  literally.     The 

Hebrew  i^7^>  here  and  frequently  answers  in  sig- 
nification to  the  Greek  itpoptxav,  Latin  aggredi.  It 
means  to  advance  to  the  attack,  but  conceives  the 
defense  as  made  from  a  higher  level.  The  point 
and  justification  of  the  inquiry  lies  in  the  word 
"first."  The  question  is  not  whether  aggressive 
measures  shall  or  shall  not  be  adopted,  but  which 
of  the  tribes  shall  initiate  them.  Hitherto,  Moses, 
and  after  him,  Joshua  have  directed  the  movements 
of  the  people.  Under  Joshua,  moreover,  all  the 
tribes  united  in  common  warfare.  All  for  one,  each 
for  all.  The  general  war  is  at  an  end  ;  the  land  is 
divided,  the  tribes  have  had  their  territories  as- 
signed them.  Now  each  single  tribe  must  engage 
the  enemies  still  settled  within  its  borders.  This 
was  another,  very  difficult  task.  It  was  a  test  of 
the  strength  and  moral  endurance  of  the  several 
tribes.  The  general  war  of  conquest  under  Joshua 
did  not  come  into  collision  with  the  joy  of  posses- 
sion and  rest,  for  these  had  as  yet  no  existence. 
But  after  the  dispersion  of  the  tribes  such  a  com- 
mon war,  under  one  leadership,  was  no  longer  prac- 
ticable. It  may  also  have  appeared  unwise  that  all 
the  tribes  should  be  engaged  in  general  and  simul- 
taneous action  within  their  several  territories.  Had 
one  tribe  been  defeated,  the  others  would  not  have 
been  in  a  position  to  assist  it.  The  question  there- 
fore concerned  the  honor  and  duty  of  the  first  at- 

1  [Cf.  on  this  rendering  the  note  under  the  text  on  p.  23. 
-T».) 

2  Cf.  Ps.  exiv.  2,  and  the  Prsikln  and  Jnlkut  on  the  Book 
of  .fudges  (3d.  Amsterd.)  §  37,  p.  2,  ch.  viii. 

8  The  history  of  Athens  contains  a  similar  instance.  The 
iouncil  of  war  before  the  battle  of  Marathon  was  presided 
}ver  by  Callimachus,  of  the  tribe  Ajax.  A  preponderance 
>f  voices,  exaggerating  the  danger,  already  inclined  to  avoid 
the  Persian  army,  when  Callimachus  voted  for  the  course 
irged  by  Miltiades.  and  turned  the  tide.  In  consequence  of 
his.  the  tribe  of  Ajax  was  specially  honored.    Notwithstand- 


tack.  As  yet  no  tribe  held  any  definite  priarity  of 
rank.  For  the  sake  of  peace  and  right.,  it  was  left 
with  God  to  determine  who  should  first  go  up  tu 
fight  against  the  inhabitants  of  the  land,  to  yrina 
them,  as  the  word  used  expresses  it,  and  thus  de- 
prive them  of  that  power  for  evil  which  as  nations 
they  possessed.      The  signification  "to  war"  of 

En7,  is  illustrated  by  the  meaning  "  to  eat,"  which 
it  also  has.  The  terrible  work  of  war  is  like  the 
action  of  the  teeth  on  bread,  it  tears  and  grinds  its 
object.    Hence  the  Greek  fidxaipa,  knife,  belongs  to 

/uaxOc"")   to   fight,  just   as  the    Hebrew  P5?£?~i 

knife,  belongs  to  ^3S,  to  eat. 

Ver.  2.  And  Jehovah  said,  Judah  shall  go 
up.  Judah  takes  a  prominent  position  among  the 
sons  of  Jacob,  even  in  the  lifetime  of  their  father 
The  misdemeanors  of  his  elder  brethren  favor  this. 
It  is  he  who  saves  Joseph  from  the  pit  in  which  the 
wrath  of  the  others  designed  him  to  perish :  and 
who,  by  suggesting  his  sale  into  Egypt,  paves  the 
way  for  the  wonderful  destinies  which  that  land  has 
in  store  for  Israel.  He  is  capable  of  confessing  his 
sins  (Gen.  xxxviii.  26).  He  pledges  himself  to 
Jacob  for  the  safe  return  of  Benjamin,  and  him  the 
patriarch  trusts.  He,  also,  in  the  hour  of  peril, 
speaks  the  decisive  word  to  the  yet  unrecognized 
Joseph  (Gen.  xliv.  18) ;  and,  although  he  bows  him- 
self before  Joseph,  the  blessing  of  Jacob  neverthe- 
less says  of  him  (Gen.  xlix.  8  If.)  :  "  Thy  brethren 
praise  thee  ;  the  sceptre  shall  not  depart  from  Ju- 
dah." The  tribe  of  Judah  holds  the  same  promi- 
nent position.  It  is  the  most  numerous  tribe.  At 
the  first  census  (Num.  ii  I.  its  military  strength  is 
greater  than  that  of  both  the  tribes  of  Joseph-  In 
the  desert,  it  leads  the  first  of  the  four  encamp- 
ments,—  that,  namely,  which  faces  the  east  (Num. 
ii.  3).a  It  began  the  decampment  and  advance 
(Num.  x.  14).  Among  those  appointed  bv  Mo-es 
to  allot  the  land,  the  representative  of  ,/tnhili  is 
named  first  (Num.  xxxiv.  19)  ;  and  hence  when  the 
allotment  was  actually  made  under  Joshua,  the  lot 
of  Judah  came  out  first  (Josh.  xv.  1). 

But  the  tribe  of  Judah  had  yet  other  merits,  by 
reason  of  which  it  took  the  initiative  on  the  present 
occasion.  When  Moses  sent  twelve  men  to  recon- 
noitre the  land,  one  man  from  each  tribe,  the  mes- 
sengers of  Judah  and  Ephraim  alone,  full  of  faith 
and  courage,  sought  to  awaken  within  the  people  a 
spirit  pleasing  to  God.  The  messenger  of  Ephraim 
was  Joshua,  the  son  of  Nun.  the  minister  of  Moses ; 
the  representative  of  Judah  was  Caleb.  Both  ob- 
tained great  credit  for  their  conduct.  Joshua  be- 
came the  successor  of  Moses.  When  Joshua  died, 
Caleb  still  lived.  The  great  respect  which  be  en- 
joyed, as  head  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  on  account 
of  the  approbation  of  Moses,  may  also  be  inferred 
from  Josh.  xiv.  6.3 

Up  then !  I  have  delivered  the  land  into  his 
hand.  "  Up  then."  the  address  of  encouragement: 
agite,  macte  !  '  Judah  may  boldly  attack  —  victory 
is  certain.     Caleb  stands  at  the  head  of  the  tribe. 

ing  the  use  of  the  lot,  the  last  place  in  the  chorus  was  never 
assigned  to  this  tribe  (Plutarch,  Qu.  Symp..  i  10.  c£ 
Bockh,  Staalsltaitsluitt  der  Athentr,  i.  743.  note).  It  is  said 
that  Charlemagne,  induced  by  the  heroic  deeds  of  Count 
Gerold,  bestowed  on  the  Swabians  the  right  of  forming  th« 
vanguard  in  every  campaign  of  the  empire. 

4  [Occasionally   H3n     may     be    properly    rendered    by 
Up  !  "'  or  "  Now  then  !  "  cf.  Ps.  exxxiv    1,  where  it  is  fol- 
lowed by  an  imperative ;  but  in  situations  like  the  present 
such  a  rendering  is  unnecessarily  free.    The  word  is  designed 


CHAPTER   I.  3-8. 


■zl 


He  ha*  already  been  assured  of  victor}'  by  Moses 
(Num.  xiv.  24 ;  Josh.  xiv.  9).  Josephus  (Ant.  v. 
2,  1)  calls  the  priest  who  officiates  Phinehas.  He 
infers  this  from  Josh.  xxiv.  33,  where  the  death  of 
Eleazar  is  recorded.  According  to  Jewish  tradition, 
Phinehas  also  wrote  the  conclusion  of  the  Book  of 
Joshua. 

HOMILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

Ver.  1 .  Israel  is  believing  and  obedient  after  the 
death  of  Joshua.  Like  a  child  after  the  death  of  its 
father,  it  has  the  best  intentions.  It  is  zealous  to 
perform,  with  speed  and  vigor,  the  task  imposed  bv 
Joshua.  As  directed  by  the  law  (Num.  xxvii.  21). 
it  inquires  of  God  through  His  priest,  the  appointed 
medium  for  announcing  His  will.  The  recollection 
of  benefits  received  from  the  departed  hero,  and  the 
feelings  of  piety  toward  him,  are  still  exerting  their 
influence.  So  does  many  a  child  finish  the  period 
of  instruction  preparatory  to  confirmation,  with  a 
heart  zealously  resolved  to  be  pious.  Many  a  Chris- 
tian comes  away  from  an  awakening  sermon  with 
resolutions  of  repentance.  Principium  fervet.  First 
love  is  full  of  glowing  zeal.  To  begin  well  is  never 
without  a  blessing.  The  best  inheritance  is  to  con- 
tinue obedient  toward  God. 

Starke  :  God  gives  more  than  we  seek  from 
him.  —  Gerlach  :  Not  even  the  task  which  had 
been  imposed  on  each  individual  tribe,  will  they 
take  in  hand,  without  having  inquired  of  the  Lord 
concerning  it. 

Ver.  2.  God  therefore  vouchsafes  direction  and 
promise.  Judah  is  to  go  before.  When  Israel  is 
believing  and  obedient,  Judah  always  goes  before 
(Gen.  xlix.  10)  :  in  the  desert,  at  the  head  of  the 
host;  after  the  time  of  the  Judges,  when  David 
sits  upon  the  throne  of  Israel ;  and  finally,  when 

to  excite  the  attention  and  put  it  on  the  alert  for  what  is 
coming.  Of  course,  the  assurance  which  here  follows  it, 
would  animate  and  incite ;  but  the  agite .'  made !  are  in  the 


the  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  conquers  the  last 
enemy,  which  is  death. 

Starke  :  If  we  also  desire  to  war  against  our 
spiritual  Canaanites  the  first  attack  must  be  made 
and  the  war  must  be  conducted,  by  Christ  Jesus, 
the  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (Rev."  v.  5). 

Lisco  :  The  words,  "  I  have  delivered  the  land,' 
are  meant  prophetically  ;  with  God  that  which  i> 
certain  in  the  future  is  as  if  it  were  present 

[Bush  (combining  Scott  and  Henry)  :  The  pre- 
cedency was  given  to  Judah  because  it  was  the 
most  numerous,  powerful,  and  valiant  of  all  the 
tribes,  and  that  which  the  Lord  designed  should 
possess  the  preeminence  in  all  respects,  as  being 
the  one  from  which  the  Messiah  was  to  spring,  and 
for  that  reason  crowned  with  the  "  excellency  of 
dignity "  above  all  its  fellows.  Judah  therefore 
must  lead  in  this  perilous  enterprise ;  for  God  not 
only  appoints  service  according  to  the  strength  and 
ability  He  has  given,  but  "  would  also  have  the 
burden  of  honor  and  the  burden  of  labor  go 
together."  Those  who  have  the  precedency  in 
rank,  reputation,  or  influence,  should  always  be 
disposed  to  go  before  others  in  every  good  work, 
undismayed  by  danger,  difficulty,  or  obloquy,  that 
they  may  encourage  others  by  their  example. 

Wordsworth  :  The  death  of  Joshua  is  the 
date  of  degeneracy.  So  in  spiritual  respects,  as 
long  as  the  true  Joshua  lives  in  the  soul,  there  is 
health.  St.  Paul  savs,  "  I  live ;  yet  not  I,  but 
Christ  lireth  in  me."  The  true  Joshua  lives  in  the 
souls  of  his  saints  ;  but  if  He  dies  in  the  soul,  that 
death  is  theirs ;  the  death  of  their  souls  ( Origen). 

Bachmann  :  As  the  Book  of  Joshua  opens  with 
the  mention  of  Moses'  death,  so  the  Book  of 
Judges  with  that  of  Joshua.  The  servants  of  the 
Lord  die  one  after  the  other ;  but  the  history  of 
his  kingdom  goes  on  uninterruptedly.  —  Tr.] 

words  to  which  i"T3n  calls  attention,  not  in  HSH  itMll 
Tb.] 


Judah  and  Simeon  agree  to  assist  each  other  in  clearing  their  allotted  lands  of  Canaan- 
ites.     They  defeat  the  enemy  in  Bezek,  capture  Adoni-bezek,  and  burn  Jerusalem 

Chapter  I.     3-8. 


3  And  Judah  said  unto  Simeon  his  brother,  Come  up  with  me  into  my  lot,  that  we 
may  [and  let  us]  fight  [together]  against  the  Canaanites  ;  and  I  likewise  will  go  with 

4  thee  into  thy  lot.  So  Simeon  went  with  him.  And  Judah  went  up,  and  the  Lord 
[Jehovah]  delivered  the  Canaanites  and  the  Perizzites  into  their  hand  :   and  they 

5  slew  [smote]  of  [omit :  of]  them  in  Bezek  ten  thousand  men.1  And  they  found 
[came  upon,  unexpectedly  met  with]   Adoni-bezek  in  Bezek  :  and   they  fought  against  him, 

6  and  they  slew  [smote]  the  Canaanites  and  the  Perizzites.  But  [And]  Adoni-bezek 
fled ;  and  they  pursued   after  him,  and  caught  him,  and  cut  off  his  thumbs  and  bis 

7  great  toes.  And  Adonibezek  said,  Threescore  and  ten  kings,  having  their  thumbs 
and  their  great  toes  cut  off,  gathered  their  meat  under  my  table ;  as  I  have  done,  so 
God  [the  Deity]   hath  requited  me.     And  they  brought  him   to  Jerusalem,  and  there 

?  he  died.  (Now  [omit  the  (  ),and  for  Now  read:  But]  the  children  [sons]  of  Judah  had 
fought  [omit :  had  2]  against  Jerusalem,  and  had  taken  it,  and  smitten  it  [and  took  it  * 
and  smote  it]  with  the  edge*  of  the  sword,  and  set  the  citv  on  fire  [gave  the  city  up 
to  the  fire]. 


28 


THE    BddK    OF  JUDGES 


TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  4.  —  K  Smote  them  in  Bezek  ten  thousand  men  "  :'.  e.  to  the  number  of  10,000  men.  Cf.  ch.  iii.  29.  31,  ete 
\s  for  the  word  71D3,  its  proper  meauing  is  "  to  strike,  to  smite  :  "  here,  doubtless,  so  far  as  the  ten  thousand  are  con- 
eerned.  to  smite  fatally,  to  kill  ;  elsewhere  (in  ver.  5,  for  instance),  to  defeat,  vanquish-  — Ta.J 

[2  Ver.  8.  —  Muthew  Henry  :  Our  translators  judge  it  [the  taking  of  Jerusalem]  spoken  of  here,  as  done  formerly  in 
Joshua's  time,  and  only  repeated  [related]  on  occasion  of  Adoni-bezek's  dying  there,  and  therefore  read  it,  "  they  had 
fought  against  Jerusalem,"  and  put  this  verse  in  a  parenthesis ;  but  the  original  speaks  of  it  as  a  thing  now  done  ;  and 
that  seems  most  probable,  because  it  is  said  to  be  done  by  the  children  of  Judah  in  particular,  not  by  all  Israel  in  general, 
whom  Joshua  commanded.  —  Tr.] 

[3  Ver.  8.  —  To  fight  against  a  city,  ™P  ""£    CPl  vH,   is  to  besiege  it,  or  assault  it  by  storm,  cf.  Josh.  x.  31  ;  2  Sam 

xii.  26.      ^D  -•   is  to  take  by  such  a  movement.     Hence  Dr.  Cassel  translates,  tr  fought  against  Jerusalem,  and  took  it  by 
storm,  ersturmtea  ts."  —  Tr.] 

[4  Ver.  8.  —  J.H  ""*^  *~  :  lit.  *'  aerordins;  to  the  mouth  (t.  e.  edge)  of  the  sword.  The  expression  denotes  unsparini 
destruction,  a  killing  whose  only  measure  is  the  sharpness  of  the  sword's  edge.     Cf.  Bertheau  in  loc. Tr.] 


Judah,  the  first  tribe.  This  summons  of  Judah  to 
Simeon  to  conquer  together  their  territories  is  in- 
structive in  several  respects.  It  shows  that  the 
whole  south  had  indeed  been  attacked,  but  was  not 
yet  occupied.  True,  the  narrative  of  the  conquest 
of  Canaan  by  Joshua  is  not  complete,  and  leaves 
much  to  be  supplied ;  but  thus  much  is  clear,  that 
though  Joshua  undoubtedly  made  war  on  the 
southern  and  northern  Canaanites,  he  by  no  means 
obtained  control  of  all  the  land.  It  is  also  evident 
from  Josh.  i.-x.  42,  that  as  long  as  Joshua  fought 
with  the  more  southern  enemies,  his  encampment 
was  at  Gilgal,  in  the  neighborhood  of  Jericho  and 
the  Jordan,  to  which  after  each  victory  over  the 
southern  kings,  whom  he  pursued  far  into  the 
southwest,  he  always  fell  back  (Josh.  x.  15,  43). 
Hence  the  conversation  with  Caleb,  concerning  the 
inheritance  of  the  latter  takes  place  while  the  camp 
is  still  at  Gilgal  (Josh  xiv.  6).  Consequently,  it 
can  only  have  been  the  result  of  victories  over  the 
northern  princes,  that  Joshua,  in  the  last  years  of 
his  regency,  transferred  the  encampment  of  the 
people  to  Shiloh  (Josh,  xviii.  1,  xxi.  2)  and  She- 
chem  (Josh  xxiv.  1).  Of  this  territory  he  had 
already  gained  permanent  possession.  It  belonged 
to  the  inheritance  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim.  Joshua 
himself  was  of  this  tribe.  That  fact  explains  how 
it  was  that  Ephraim  was  the  first  to  come  into  se- 
cure and  permanent  territorial  possession.  In  this 
also  Joshua  differs  from  Moses.  The  latter,  al- 
though sprung  from  the  tribe  of  Levi,  belonged  to 
all  the  tribes.  He  was  raised  above  every  special 
tribe-relationship.  His  grave  even  none  can  boast 
of.  Joshua  does  not  deny  that  he  belongs  to  Joseph, 
although  he  does  not  yield  to  their  less  righteous 
demands  (Josh.  xvii.  14).  His  tribe  forms  the  first 
circle  around  him.  When  he  locates  the  national 
centre  in  Shiloh  and  Shechem,  it  is  in  the  posses- 
sions of  Ephraim.  Here,  as  long  as  Joshua  lived, 
the  government  of  the  Israelitish  tribes  and  their 
sanctuary  had  their  seat.  Here  the  bones  of 
Joseph  were  buried ;  here  are  the  sepulchres  of 
Joshua  and  his  contemporary,  the  priest  Eleazar. 
Ephraim  was  the  point  from  which  the  farthei 
warlike  expeditions  of  the  individual  tribes  wen 
directed  Precisely  because  the  first  permanenth 
held  possession  had  connected  itself  with  Joshua 
and  his  tribe,  the  summons  to  seize  and  occupy 
their  assigned  territory  came  next  to  Judah  and  its 
prince  Caleb,  the  associate  of  Joshua,  and  after 
him  the   first   man    of    Israel.     But  Judah    and 


EXEOETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  3.  And  Judah  said  unto  Simeon  his 
brother.  In  matters  of  war  the  tribes  were  repre- 
sented by  the  Nesi'im  (DS'PJ1.  A  Nasi,  prince 
or  chief,  stood  at  the  head  of  each  tribe,  and  acted 
in  its  name,  although  with  great  independence. 
At  the  numbering  of  the  people  in  the  desert,  the 
Nasi  of  Judah  was  Nahshon,  the  son  of  Aminadab ; 
but  after  the  sending  of  the  spies,  Caleb,  the  son  of 
Jephunneh,  held  that  position  (Num.  xxxiv.  19). 
According  to  the  directions  of  Moses  in  the  pas- 
sage just  referred  to,  these  princes  were  to  assist 
the  Priest  and  Joshua  in  the  allotment  of  the  land 
to  the  tribes.  They  are  the  same  who,  in  Josh. 
xix.  51,  are  called  "heads  of  families."  For,  as 
appears  especially  from  Josh.  xxii.  14,  only  he 
could  he  Acui  who  was  "  head  of  a  family."  Col- 
lectively, they  are  styled  "  the  princes  of  the  con- 
gregation "  (Josh.  xxii.  30).  That  Moses  names 
only  ten  (Num.  xxxiv.  18,  etc.),  arises  from  the 
fact  that  he  refers  only  to  the  allotment  of  the  land 
this  side  the  Jordan-  The  princes  of  the  two  and 
a  half  tribes  beyond  the  Jordan  had  nothing  to  do 
with  this.  When  the  trans-Jordanic  tribes  were 
erroneously  suspected  of  apostasy,  the  ten  princes 
with  the  priest  went  to  them  as  an  embassy  from  the 
other  tribes  (Josh.  xxii.  14).  It  was  these  princes 
who  ratified  the  treaty  with  the  Gibeonites  (Josh. 
ix.  15) ;  and  the  congregation  was  bound  by  theit 
oath,  although  greatly  dissatisfied  when  the  decep- 
tion of  the  Gibeonites  was  discovered. 

Come  up  with  me  into  my  lot.     The  territory 

of  a  single  tribe  was  called  its  lot,  ;^P3.  C;  rc- 
pare  the  Greek  kAtjoos,  used  to  denote  p;35essions 
in  general,  and  also  the  portion  of  territory  as- 
signed to  each  party  embarked  in  a  colonial  enter- 
prise.  ("  Croesus  devastated  the  lots  of  the  Syrians," 
<p8tipu>v  tovs  KAypovt,  Herod,  i  76.)  —  It  was  nat- 
ural for  Judah  to  summon  his  brother  Simeon  to 
join  him;  for  Simeon's  territory  lay  within  the 
borders  of  Judah.1  According  to  the  statements 
jf  Jo.-h.  xv.,  the  inheritance  assigned  to  the  tribe 
of  Judah  might  be  bounded  by  two  lines,  drawn 
respectively  from  the  northern  and  southern  ex- 
tremities of  the  Dead  Sea  to  the  Mediterranean, 
:hr  northern  line  passing  below  Jerusalem.  Sim- 
eon's part  lay  in  the  middle  between  these  iines, 
toward  the  west.  For  this  reason,  Simeon  is  al- 
ready in   Num.  xxxiv.  20  named  second,  next  to 

1  [Keil  :  Simeon  is  called  the  "  brother"  of  Judah,  not  lay  within  that  of  Judah  (Josh.  xix.  1  fT.),  on  account  of 
to  much  because  they  both  descended  from  one  mother,  which  Simeon's  connection  with  Judah  was  closer  than  thai 
>-<ih  ((Jen    xxix.  33.  35),  as  because    Simeon's    inheritance    of  the  other  tribes. — Tr.] 


CHAPTER   I.   3-8. 


26 


Simeon  cannot  have  set  out  on  their  expedition 
from  Shiloh  or  Shechem.  There  was  not  room 
enough  in  the  territory  of  the  tribe  of  Ephnvim  to 
afford  camping-ground  for  all  Israel.  The  en 
campment  in  Gilgal  had  not  ceased;  and  there  the 
tribe  of  Judah  found  a  suitable  station  whence  to 
gain  possession  of  its  own  land.  Thence  they 
i-ould  enter  immediately  into  the  territory  assigned 
them.  Moreover,  it  is  only  upon  the  supposition 
that  Gilgal  was  the  point  of  departure  of  the 
army  of  Judah,  that  it  becomes  entirely  clear  why 
Judah  turned  to  his  brother  Simeon.  Had  he  come 
down  from  Shechem,  he  might  also  have  turned 
to  Benjamin.  But  Simeon  needed  the  same  ave- 
nue into  his  dominions  as  Judah.  He  must  pass 
through  the  country  of  the  latter  to  reach  his 
own.  From  Gilgal,  the  armies  of  Judah  advanced 
along  the  boundary  line  between  their  own  land 
and  Benjamin,  in  the  direction  of  the  western 
shore  of  the  Dead  Sea  which  formed  their  eastern 
border  (Josh.  xv.  5-7),  intending  to  march  through 
the  wilderness,  and  perhaps  after  passing  Tekoah, 
to  turn  first  against  Hebron.  There  the  enemy 
met  them.1 

Ver.  4.  And  they  smote  them  in  Bezek,  ten 
thousand  men.  The  position  of  Bezek  is  indicated 
by  the  direction  of  Judah's  advance.  It  must  have 
been  already  within  the  limits  of  Judah  ;  for  "  Ju- 
dah went  up,"  namely,  to  his  territory.  Its  distance 
from  Jerusalem  cannot  have  been  great,  for  they 
brought  the  wounded  and  maimed  Adoni-bezek 
thither,  and  immediately  after  the  battle  in  Bezek 
the  tribes  attack  Jerusalem  If  it  were  the  name  of 
a  city,  the  place  bearing  it  would  seem  to  have  been 
of  such  importance,  as  to  make  it  matter  of  surprise 
that  we  find  no  further  mention  of  it.s  The  name 
announces  itself  as  an  appellative  derived  from  the 

eharacter  of  the  region.  p.T.2  (Bezek)  is  undoubtedly 

equivalent  to  P"^3  (Barak).  It  designates  unfruit- 
ful, stony  sand-areas  (Syrtes).  The  desert  Barca  in 
North  Africa  is  familiar  in  ancient  and  modern 
times.  The  inhabitants  of  deserts  received  the  name 
Barcaeans,  as  Jerome  remarks  (Ep.  exxix. ),  "  from 
the  city  Barca,  which  lies  in  the  desert."  At  the 
present  day  a  chasm  in  the  rocks,  in  the  peninsula 
of  Sinai,  bears  the  name  Bereika  (Bitter,  xiv.  547). 
The  ancient  name  Bene-berak  (Josh.  xix.  45)  also 

explains  itself  in  this  way.  In  Arabic  Hp"13  des- 
ignates stony,  unfruitful  land.  Now,  the  land  west 
of  the  Dead  Sea,  through  which  Judah  marched 
into  his  territory,  is  for  the  most  part  of  this  char- 
acter. "  The  desert  here,  covered  with  chalk  and 
crumbling  limestone,  and  without  the  least  trace  of 
vegetation,  has  a  truly  terrible  appearance  "  (Bitter, 

1  [That  Judah,  nor  in  feet  any  of  the  western  tribes,  ex- 
cept Ephraini,  had  not  hitherto  enjoyed  actual  possession 
of  any  part  of  his  land,  is  also  the  view  of  Bertheau  and 
Ewald.  It  is  strenuously  objected  to  by  Bachmann,  who 
maintains  that tr  not  only  the  allotment  of  the  land  among 
the  tribes,  but  also  its  actual  occupation  by  them,  are  con- 
stantly presupposed  in  all  that  this  first  chapter  relates  both 
about  the  prosecution  of  the  local  wars,  and  the  many  in- 
stances of  sinful  failure  to  prosecute  them."  And,  certainly, 
such  passages  as  Josh,  xxiii.  1  and  xxiv.  28,  cf.  Judg  ii.  6, 
appear  at  least  to  be  decidedly  against  the  view  taken  by 
oar  author  The  subject,  however,  is  obscure  and  intri- 
cate, and  not  to  be  entered  upon  in  a  foot-note Tr.] 

2  The  name  does  indeed  occur  again  in  1  Sam.  xi.  8,  where 
Saul  numbers  Israel  in  Bezek.  But  the  very  fact  that  Be- 
Eek  is  there  used  as  a  place  for  mustering  troops,  shows  that 
it  is  open  country,  not  any  thickly  peopled  spot.  It  cannot 
be  maintained  that  both  Bezeks  must  designate  the  same  re- 

.glon.     Similar  topographical  conditions  conferred  similar  or 


xv.  653  (Gage's  Transl.,  iii.  114).  It  was  in  this 
tract  that  the  battle  was  joined,  which  ended  in  the 
defeat  of  the  Canaanite  and  Perizzite.  The  nam* 
Canaanites  passed  over  from  the  cities  of  the  Phee 
nician  Lowlands  (Canaan),  to  the  inhabitants  of 
cities  throughout  the  land.  It  designates  the  popu 
lation  devoted  to  agriculture  and  the  arts  of  civil 
ized  life.  Perizzites  may  have  been  the  name  of 
tribes  of  Bedouins,  inhabitants  of  tents,  roving  a: 
will  among  the  mountains  and  in  the  desert.  Dowt 
to  the  present  time,  the  eastern  part  of  Judah,  ad- 
joining the  Dead  Sea,  is  a  true  Bedouin  highway, 
especially  for  all  those  Arabs  who  press  forward 
from  the  east  and  south.  The  Canaanites  and 
Perizzites  unite  to  meet  the  common  enemy  in  the 
desert  tract,  just  as  Zenobia  united  herself  with  the 
Saracens  of  the  desert  against  the  Romans.  They 
are  defeated,  and  there  fall  ten  thousand  men,  i.  e. 
fivpioi,  myriads,  an  indefinitely  large  number 
From  the  tact  that  Bezek  does  not  designate  a  par- 
ticular place,  but  the  region  in  general,  it  becomes 
plain  that  verses  4  and  5  do  not  relate  the  same  oc- 
currence twice.  Verse  4  speaks  of  the  first  conflict. 
The  second  was  offered  by  Adoni-bezek  (ver.  5). 

Ver.  5.  And  they  came  upon  Adoni-bezek 
in  Bezek.  We  can  trace  the  way  which  Judah 
took,  with  Simeon,  to  the  borders  assigned  him. 
From  Gilgal  it  proceeded  to  Beth-hogla  (Am 
Hajla),  through  the  wide  northern  plain  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  on  its  northwestern  shore,  to  the  region 
at   present   traversed  by  the   Ta'Smirah   Bedouin 

tribes.    This  region  was  named  Bezek.    p.T3  and 

P"^3  primarily  signify  "  dazzling  brightness ; ' 
hence  the  signification  "  lightning."  It  was  doubt- 
less the  dazzling  glare  of  the  ground,  produced  by 
the  reflection  of  the  sun  whether  from  the  white  salt- 
crust  of  the  surface,  the  rocks,4  or  the  undulating 
sandhills,  that  suggested  the  name  Bezek  for  such 
regions.  This  primary  sense  enables  us,  moreover, 
also  to  discover  the  connection  between  Adoni-bezek 
and  Bezek.  That  the  latter  is  not  a  city,  might 
have  been  sufficiently  inferred  from  the  tact  that 
notwithstanding  the  victory  no  record  is  made  here, 
as  in  the  cases  of  other  cities,  of  its  fall  and  destruc- 
sion.  To  take  Adoni-bezek  as  Prince  of  Bezek,  docs 
not  seem  advisable.  The  proper  names  of  heathen 
kings  always  have  reference  to  their  religion.5 
Since  Adoni-bezek,  after  having  been  mutilated, 
was  carried  by  his  attendants  to  Jerusalem,  he  must 
have  held  some  relation  to  that  city.  Only  thai 
supposition  enables  us  to  see  why  Judah  and"  Sim- 
eon storm  Jebus  (Jerusalem),  belonging  as  it  did 
to  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  for  which  reason  the\ 
make  no  attempt  to  hold  it  by  garrisoning  it.  Al- 
ready in  the  10th  chapter  of  Joshua  we  meet  with 

identical  names.  Bene-berak  [sons  of  Berak,  Josh.  xix.  45, 
as  to  the  origin  and  significance  of  the  name  compare  the 
commentary  on  vers.  4  and  5.  —  Tr.]  was  in  the  tribe  of  Dan. 
And  so  a  region  west  of  the  Jordan,  and  east  of  Shechem,  sc 
fir  at  least  as  we  can  determine  the  true  direction  from  the 
narrative  [in  Sam.  xi.  8],  seems  also  to  have  borne  the  name 
Bezek. 

According  to  the  fnterchange  of  r  and  5  as  in  }"Vf  H  and 

]Tin  (Ezek.  i.  14),  quaero  and  quaeso,  etc  In  Ezok.  i.  14 
bezek  (bazalc)  denotes  a  dazzling  radiance.  Barak,  lightning, 
became  a  proper  name.  In  the  regions  of  Barca  (the  desert) 
the  name  Barcas  (Hamiloar)  was  familiar  enough. 

4  t(  The  glitter  of  the  (gravel)  surface  in  the  sunshine,  u 
not  a  little  trying  to  the  eyes."  —  Strauss,  Sinai  und  (jot 
golha,  iii.  1,  133. 

6  Cf.  my  Orlsnamen  (Erfurt,  1856),  i.  118. 


30 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


Adoni-zedek  in  Jerusalem,  just  as  in  the  history  of 
Abraham  Melchi-zedek  appears  there.  Adon  is  a 
Phoenician  designation  of  the  Deity.  Adoni-zedek 
and  Melchi-zedek  mean,  "  My  God,  my  king,  is  Ze- 
dek."  The  names  of  the  kings  enunciated  their 
creeds.  Zedek  ( Sadyk,  Sydyk, )  belongs  to  the  star- 
worship  of  the  Canaanites,  and  according  to  ancient 
tradition  was  the  name  of  the  planet  Jupiter. 
Adoni-bezek  manifestly  expresses  a  similar  idea 
Bezek  —  Barak  is  the  dazzling  brightness,  which  is 
also  peculiar  to  Jupiter.  His  Sanskrit  name  is 
"  Brahaspati  (Briltaspati),1  Father  of  Brightness." 
"My  God  is  Brightness,"  is  the  creed  contained  in 
the  name  Adoni-oezek.  His  name  alone  might  lead 
us  to  consider  him  King  of  Jerusalem,  to  which,  as 
if  it  were  his  royal  residence,  his  own  attendants  carry 
him  after  his  defeat.- 

Ver.  6.  And  Adoni-bezek  fled,  .  .  .  . 
and  they  cut  off  the  thumbs  of  his  hands  and 
feet,  etc.  How  horrible  is  the  history  of  human 
cruelty !  It  is  the  mark  of  ungodliness,  that  it 
glories  in  the  agony  of  him  whom  it  calls  an  en- 
emy. The  mutilation  of  the  human  body  is  the 
tyranny  of  sin  over  the  work  of  God,  which  it  never- 
theless fears.  The  Persian  king  Artaxerxes  caused 
the  arm  of  his  brother,  which  had  bent  the  bow 
against  him,  to  be  hewn  off,  even  after  death. 
Thumbs  were  cut  off  to  incapacitate  the  hand  for 
using  the  bow,  great  toes  to  render  the  gait  uncer- 
tain. When  in  456  b.  c,  the  inhabitants  of  jEgina 
were  conquered  by  the  Athenians,  the  victors  or- 
dered their  right  thumbs  to  be  cut  off,  so  that,  while 
still  able  to  handle  the  oar,  they  might  be  incapable 
of  using  the  spear  (JElian,  Var.  Hist.,  ii.  9).  Mo- 
hammed (Sura,  viii.  12)  gave  orders  to  punish  the 
enemies  of  Islam  by  cutting  off  their  heads  and  the 
ends  of  their  fingers,  and  blames  its  omission  in  the 
battle  of  Beder.  In  the  German  Waldweisthtirnern 
the  penalty  against  hunters  and  poachers  of  having 
their  thumbs  cut  off,  is  of  frequent  occurrence 
(Grimm,  Rechtsalterth.,  707  ;  Deutsches  Worterb.  ii. 
346).3  Adoni-bezek,  in  his  pride,  enjoyed  the  hor- 
rible satisfaction  of  making  the  mutilated  wretches 
pick    up   their  food  under  his  table,  hungry  and 

1  Of.  Bohlen,  Altes  lmlien,  ii.  248. 

'I  [Bezek  is  generally  regarded  as  the  name  of  a  city  or 
Tillage.  The  majority  of  scholars  (Le  Clerc,  Rosenmuller, 
Beland,  V.  Rauuier,  Bachmann,  etc.)  look  for  it  in  the  terri- 
tory of  .lU'iah,  but  without  being  able  to  discover  any  traces 
of  it,  which  is  certainly  remarkable;  for,  if  a  city,  it  must 
have  been,  as  Dr.  Cassel  remarks,  and  as  the  usual  interpre- 
tation of  Adoni-bezek  as  King  of  Bezek  implies,  a  place  of 
nouie  importance.  Others,  therefore  {as  Bertheau,  Keil, 
Ewald,  etc.),  connect  this  Bezek  with  that  of  1  Sam.  xi.  8, 
and  both  with  the  following  statement  in  the  Onoiiiasttcon : 
(r  hodie  duae  villae  sunt  nomine  Bezech,  vicinae  sibi.  in  deci- 
mo  septitno  lapide  a  Neapoli,  descendeutibus  Scythopolin." 
Then  to  account  for  this  northern  position  of  the  armies  of 
Judah  and  Simeon.  Bertheau  supposes  them  to  set  out  from 
Shechem  (cf.  Josh.  xxiv.  1,  etc.),  and  tc  make  a  detour  thence 
to  the  northeast,  either  for  the  purpose  of  descending  to  the 
south  by  way  of  the  Jordun  valley,  or  for  some  other  reason  ; 
while  Keil,  without  naming  any  place  of  departure,  suggests 
that  Judah  and  Simeon  may  have  been  compelled,  before  en- 
gaging the  Canaanites  in  their  own  allotments,  to  meet  those 
coming  down  upon  them  from  the  north,  whom  after  defeating, 
they  then  pursued  as  far  as  Bezek.  Dr.  Cassefs  explanation 
is  attractive  as  well  as  ingenious  ;  but,  to  say  nothing  about 
the  uncertainty  of  its  etymology,  Bezek,  as  an  appellative 
tpplied  to  a  definite  region,  would,  as  Bachmann  remarks, 

lequire  the  article,  cf.  3.19(7,  n^C'Vil,  ~)33n.  — Ta.] 
3  Hence,  on  the  other  haud,  the  severe  puniflhment  which 
the  ancient  popular  laws  adjudged  to  him  who  unjustly  cuts 
iff  another's  thumb.  The  fine  was  almost  as  high  as  for 
he  who*e  hand.     The  Salic  law  rated  the  hand  at  2,500,  the 


whining  like  dogs.4  Ourtius  relates  that  the  Per 
sians  had  preserved  Greek  captives,  mutilated  m 
their  hands,  feet,  and  ears,  "  for  protracted  sport " 
[in  longum  sui  ludibriwn  reservaverant.  Ue  Reims  Gest. 
Alex.,  v.  5,  6).  Posidonius  (in  Athenasus,  iv.  152, 
d.)  tells  how  the  king  of  the  Parthians  at  his  meals 
threw  food  to  his  courtier,  who  caught  it  like  a  dog 
(to  7raoa/3A7j0€P  Kvvtenl  o-creiTai),  and  was  more- 
over beaten  like  a  dog.  The  tribe  of  Judah  simply 
recompensed  Adoni-bezek :  not  from  revenge,  for 
Israel  had  not  suffered  anything  from  him ;  nor 
from  pleasure  in  the  misery  of  others,  for  they  left 
him  in  the  hands  of  his  own  people. 

Ver.  7.  As  I  have  done,  so  has  the  Deity5 
completed  unto  me.     Many  (in  round  numbers, 

seventy)  are  they  whom  he  has  maltreated.     E?^? 

(Piel  of  D?27)  is  to  finish,  complete,  and  hence  to 
requite ;  for  reward  and  punishment  are  insepara- 
bly connected  with  good  and  evil  deeds.  As  the 
blossom  reaches  completion  only  in  the  fruit,  so 
deeds  in  their  recompense.  The  Greeks  used 
re\e?v  in  the  same  sense.  "  When  the  Olympian 
(says  Homer,  Iliad,  iv.  160)  does  not  speedily  pun- 
ish [ereKecraei/),  he  still  does  it  later  (eic  re  na)  o\J/i 
tcX«)."  It  was  an  ethical  maxim  extensively 
accepted  among  ancient  nations  that  men  must 
suffer  the  same  pains  which  they  have  inflicted  on 
others.  The  later  Greeks  called  this  the  Neopto- 
lemic  Tisis,  from  the  circumstance  that  Neoptoleinus 
was  punished  in  the  same  way  in  which  he  had 
sinned  (Pausanius,  iv.  17,  3;  Niigelsbach,  Nach- 
horn.  Theologie,  343).  He  had  murdered  at  the 
altar,  and  at  the  altar  he  was  murdered.  Phaleris 
had  roasted  human  beings  in  a  brazen  bull  —  the 
same  punishment  was  inflicted  on  himself."  That 
which  Dionysius  had  done  to  the  women  of  his 
people,  his  own  daughters  were  made  to  undergo 
(iElian,  Var.  Hist.,  ix.  8).  Jethro  says  (Ex.  xviii. 
11),  "  for  the  thing  wherein  they  sinned,  came  upon 
them." 

And  they  brought  him  to  Jerusalem.  None 
but  his  own  people  :  could  bring  him  thither,  for 
the  city  was  not  yet  taken.     It  was  evidently  his 

thumb  of  hand  or  foot  at  2,000  denarii,  "  qui  faciunt  solidos 
quinquaeintn  "  (Lex  SaUca,  xxix.  3,  ed.  Merkel,  p.  16). 

4  [Kitto  [Daily  Bible  Illustrations:  Moses  and  the  Judges, 
p.  299)  :  "  This  helps  us  to  some  insight  of  the  suite  of  the 
country  under  the  native  princes,  whom  the  Israelites  were 
commissioned  to  expel.  Conceive  what  must  have  been  the 
state  of  the  people  among  whom  such  a  scene  could  exist,  — 
what  wars  had  been  waged,  what  cruel  ravages  committed, 
before  these  seventy  kings  —  however  small  their  territories 
—  became  reduced  to  this  condition;  and  behold  in  this  a 
specimen  of  the  fashion  in  which  war  was  conducted,  and  of 
the  treatment  to  which  the  conquered  were  exposed.  Those 
are  certainly  very  much  in  the  wrong  who  picture  to  them- 
selves the  Canaanites  as  '  a  happy  family,'  disturbed  in  their 
peaceful  homes  by  the  Hebrew  barbarians  from  the  wilder 
ness  Behold  how  happy,  behold  how  peaceful,  they  were! '' 
-TB.) 

5  Elokim,  which  is  also  used  of  the  heathen  deity.  The 
speaker  speaks  in  the  spirit  of  heathenism.     As  regards  the 

seventy  kings,  it  needs  no  argument  to  show  that  ?J|?D 
like  the  Greek  rvpavyoj,  is  applied  to  any  ruler,  even  of  a 
6ingle  city.  Josephus  (Anl.,  v.  2,  2)  read  seventy-two,  which 
especially  in  his  time,  was  interchangeable  as  a  round  nuin 
ber  with  seventy. 

6  In  the  Gesla  Romanorum,  oh.  xlviii.,  this  is  still  ad 
duced  as  a  warning,  and  with  an  allusion  to  the  passage  io 
Ovid,  De  Arte  Atnandi,  i.  653  [Et  Pnaleris  lanro  violentt 
membra  Perilli  tomtit.  In/elix  imbuil  auctor  opus. — Tb.] 
it  is  remarked  :  "  neque  tnim  lex  ttquior  ulla,  quam  neru 
artifices  arte  pertre  sua.v 

1  Since  it  is  Adoni-bezek  who  speaks  in  ver.  7,  the  word 


CHAPTER   I.  9,  10. 


31 


city;  for  the  Israelites  follow  after,  and  complete 
their  victory  by  its  capture.  The  storming  of  Jeru- 
salem for  its  own  sake  could  not  have  formed  part 
of  the  plan  of  the  tribes,  since  it  belonged  to  Ben- 
jamin. They  were  led  to  it  by  the  attack  which 
they  suffered  from  Adoni-bezek.  Nor  did  they  take- 
possession  of  it.  They  only  broke  the  power  of  the 
king  thoroughly.  He  died  miserably ;  his  people 
were  put  to  the  sword ;  the  city  was  consumed  by 

fire  (K?K3  i"lvtT,  to  abandon  to  the  flames).  Thus 
the  wanton  haughtiness  of  Adoni-bezek  was  terribly 
requited. 

HOMILETICAL    AND   PRACTICAL. 

Ver.  3.  Believing  Israel  is  also  united  Israel. 
Judah  and  Simeon  go  forth  together,  in  faith,  as 
one  tribe,  one  heart,  and  one  soul,  to  the  same  vic- 
tory. So  united  are  children,  when  in  faith  they 
return  from  their  father's  grave  [cf.  Horn.  Hints  on 
ch.  i.  1.  —  Tr.].  The  children  of  God  are  good 
brothers  and  sisters.  They  do  not  quarrel  over  the 
inheritance,  —  they  enjoy  it  in  love.  Believing 
Israel  is  a  sermon  on  unity  among  families,  neigh- 
bors, citizens,  and  nations.  Union  arises  not  from 
without,  but  from  within.  Penitence  and  faith 
bind  together.  Unio  is  the  name  of  a  pearl,  and 
pearls  symbolize  tears.  Ex  unions  lux.  E  luce 
uniones. 

Starke  :  As  all  Christians  in  general,  so 
brothers  and  sisters  in  particular,  should  maintain 
a  good  understanding,  and  live  together  in  peace 
and  unity. 

[Henrt  :  It  becomes  Israelites  to  help  one 
another  against  Canaanites ;  and  all  Christians, 
even  those  of  different  tribes,  to  strengthen  one 
another's  hands  against  the  common  interests  of 
Satan's  kingdom.  Those  who  thus  help  one 
another  in  love,  have  reason  to  hope  that  God  will 
help  them  both. 

Bachmann  :  It  is  not  incompatible  with  the 
obedience  of  faith,  that  Judah  makes  use  of  the 
helps  placed  by  God  at  his  disposal ;  and  it  is  in 
accordance  with  the  dictates  of  fraternal  love  that 
he  makes  that  tribe  the  companion  of  his  under- 
taking whose  lot  it  was  made  rather  to  attach  itself 
to  others  than  to  equal  their  independence  (cf.  Gen. 

^~S^*1  in  the  same  verse  cannot  refer  to  the  Israelites. 
Why  should  they  carry  him  with  them  ?  It  would  indicate 
the  gratification  of  gratuitous  cruelty,  a  thing  inconceivable 
in  this  connection.  Those  who  save  him  are  his  own  ser- 
rants ;  but  arrived  at  Jerusalem  he  dies.     Verse  8,  there- 


xlix.  7,  and  also  the  silence  of  Deut.  xxxiii.  con- 
cerning Simeon),  and  whose  interests  were  pecul 
iarly  closely  connected  with  his  own.. —  Tr.] 

Vers.  4-8.  Starke  :  In  the  lives  of  men, 
things  are  often  wonderfully  changed  about,  and 
not  by  accident,  but  bv  the  wonderful  governance 
of  God  (Gen.  1.  19). 

The  same  :  God  requites  every  one  according 
to  his  deeds.  Wherein  one  sins,  therein  he  is  also 
punished,  —  evidence  that  there  is  a  God,  and  that 
He  is  j  ust,  recompensing  according  to  deserts. 

[Scott  :  Men  often  read  their  crimes  in  their 
punishments ;  and  at  last  every  mouth  shall  be 
stopped,  and  all  sinners  be  constrained  to  admit 
the  justice  of  God  in  their  extremest  miseries 
Happy  they  who  justify  Him  in  their  temporal 
afflictions,  plead  guilty  before  his  mercy-seat,  and 
by  repentance  and  faith  seek  deliverance  from  the 
wrath  to  come. 

Joseph  Mede  (t  1638)  :  As  I  have  done  so 
God  hath  requited  me:  1.  God  punishetb  sin  with 
temporal  punishment  in  this  life  as  well  as  with 
eternal  in  the  life  to  come.  2.  God  doth  not  always 
presently  inflict  his  judgments  while  the  sin  is 
fresh,  but  sometimes  defers  that  long  which  He 
means  to  give  home  at  the  last.  3.  These  divine 
judgments  by  some  conformity  or  affinity  do  carry 
in  them  as  it  were  a  stamp  and  print  of  the  sin  for 
which  they  are  inflicted.  4.  The  profit  and  pleas- 
ure which  men  aim  at  when  they  commit  sin  will 
not  so  much  as  quit  cost  even  in  this  life. 

Wordsworth  :  As  by  this  specimen  at  the 
beginning  of  this  book,  showing  what  two  tribes  of 
Israel  could  do  by  faith  and  obedience  against 
Adoni-bezek,  who  had  subdued  and  enslaved  seventy 
kings,  God  showed  what  the  twelve  tribes  might  have 
done,  if  they  had  believed  and  obeyed  him ;  and 
that  all  their  subsequent  miseries  were  due  to  de- 
fection from  God;  —  in  like  manner,  also,  in  the 
Christian  Church,  if  men  had  followed  the  exam- 
ples of  the  Apostles,  —  thejudahs  and  Simeons  of 
the  first  ages,  —  and  gone  forth  in  their  spirit  of 
faith  and  love  against  the  powers  of  darkness,  they 
might  long  since  have  evangelized  the  world.  All 
the  distresses  of  Christendom  are  ascribable  to 
desertions  of  [from]  Christ,  and  not  to  any  imper- 
fection (as  some  have  alleged)  in  Christianity  (cf. 
Bp.  Butler,  Analogy,  Part  it.  ch.  1).  —  Tr.] 

fore,  commences  very  properly,  not    with    the   mere  vert 

^Flv  ^l,  but  with  a  repetition  of  the  grammatical  »uh 

ject:  rrnrT  "05. 


The  sons  of  Judah  smite  the  Anakim  and  take  Hebron. 
Chapter  I.  9,  10 


9  And  afterward  [Hereupon]  the  children  [sons]  of  Judah  went  down  [proceeded]  to 
fight  against  the  Canaanites  that  dwelt  in  the  mountain  [mountains],  and  in  the  south. 
10  and  in  the  valley  [lit.  depression,  low  country].  And  Judah  went  against  the  Ca- 
naanites that  dwelt  in  Hebron  :  (now  the  name  of  Hebron  before  [formerly]  was 
Kirjath-arba  [The  Four  Cities  *]  :)  and  they  slew  [smote]  Sheshai,  and  Ahiman 
and  Talmai. 


82 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


TEXTUAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL,. 

[1  Ver.  10.  This  is  the  nearest  we  can  come  in  English  to  Dr.  Cassel's  Vierstadt,  Tetrapolis.  AgainBt  the  ccnimoo 
Interpretation,  K  City  of  Arba,"  —  Arba  being  taken  as  the  name  of  a  person,  —  cf.  Mr.  Grove  in  Smiths  Bib.  Diet.,  s.  v 
Kirjath-arba.  —  Ts.J 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 
Ver.  9  f.     Hereupon  trie  sons  of  Judah   pro- 
ceeded. They  advanced,  proceeded,  1TJ\    While 

71  ;V,  "  ascendere,"  was  used  to  express  the  first 
attack  (ver.  4),  the  continuation  of  the  conflict  is 
indicated  by  "H^,  "  descendere,"  although  they  ad- 
vance mountain-ward.  Verse  9  sets  forth  the  full 
extent  of  the  task  undertaken  by  the  tribes.  Before 
advancing  into  the  territory  allotted  them,  they 
have  been  obliged  to  resist  the  attack  of  Adoni- 
bezek  at  its  border.  They  divide  their  work  proper 
into  the  conquest  of  the  mountains,  the  occupancy 
of  the  southern  tract  from  the  Dead  Sea  to  Beer- 
sheba,  and  the  seizure  of  the  western  lowlands. 
Details  of  these  undertakings  are  given  us  only  so 
far  as  they  concern  Caleb  and  his  house.  Hence, 
the  conquest  of  Hebron  is  first  of  all  related.  About 
this  ancient  city,1  where  Abraham  tarried,  and  the 
patriarchs  repose  in  the  family-vault,  the  recollec- 
tions of  the  tribe  of  Judah  concentrate  themselves. 
It  was  of  old  the  dwelling-place  of  valiant  people. 
The  robust  vine-dressers  of  the  valley,  ages  before, 
supported  Abraham  in  his  victorious  expedition 
against  the  eastern  hosts.  But  on  the  mountains 
there  dwelt  a  wild  and  warlike  race,  the  sons  of 
Anak,  before  whom  the  faint-hearted  spies  of  Moses 
formerly  trembled.  Only  Caleb  and  Joshua  were 
full  of  confidence  in  God.  On  this  account,  Caleb  re- 
ceived the  special  assurance  of  Moses  that  he  should 
possess  the  land  which  he  had  seen  ;  and  therefore  at 
the  division  of  the  country  by  Joshua,  he  brings  for- 
ward his  claim  to  it  (Josh.  xiv.  12).  Joshua  allows 
it.  It  is  no  lightly-gained  inheritance  that  Caleb 
asks  :  "  Therefore  give  me  (he  says)  this  mountain, 
whereof  the  Lord  spake  in  that  day ;  for  thou  hast 
heard  that  there  are  Anakim  there,  and  cities  great 
and  fenced;  perhaps  the  Lord  will  be  with  me  that 
I  drive  them  out"  (Josh.  xiv.  12).  Xow,  although 
the  conquest  of  the  city,  and  the  expulsion  of  the 
Anakim,  are  already  recorded  in  Josh.  xv.  14.  that 
is  only  an  anticipatory  historical  notice  in  connec- 
tion with  the  description  of  boundaries.  The  events 
actually  occur  now,  in  connection  with  the  first 
efforts  to  gain  permanent  possession  of  the  terri- 
tory. Caleb,  it  is  true,  is  old  ;  but  younger  heroes 
surround  him.     They  defeated  the  Anakim. 

Ver.  10.  Hebron,  formerly  called  the  Four 
Cities  (Kirjath-arba).  It  is  difficult  to  see  why 
modern  expositors  -  take  offense  at  the  idea  that  in 
Hebron   an  earlier  Tetrapolis  is  to  be  recognized. 

1  Hebron  is  said  to  be  teven  years  older  than  Zoau  iTanis) 
in  Eg\  pi  (Num.  xiii.  22).  The  number  "seven  :'  is  here  also 
to  be  regarded  as  a  round  number.  It  expresses  the  finished 
lapse  of  a  long  period. 

2  Ritter'8  remarks  (xvi.  211  [Gage's  Trausl.  iii.  292,  seq.]), 
would  admit  of  many  corrections.  Jerome,  it  is  true,  follows 
Jewish  traditions  (cf.  Pirke  ft.  Eliezer,  ch.  xx.)  when  he 
thinks  that  the  Civitas  Quatttor  was  so  named  from  the 
patriarchs  who  were  buried  there.  It  is,  however,  none  the 
less  evident  from  this,  that  the  Jews  of  old  interpreted 
Kirjath-arba  as  meaning  "  Tetrapolis."  Nor  does  Num.  xiii. 
22  afford  the  slightest  occasion  for  doubting  the  truth  of  the 
Itatement  that  Kirjath-arba  was  the  former  uame  of  Hebron. 
Rit!«r  seems  especially  to  have  followed  Robinson  {Bibl.  Res. 
i   XX  \ 


The  remark,  Josh.  xiv.  15:  "And  the  name  ol 
Hebron  was  formerly  Kirjath-arba,  /l"T|rT  CIKH 
S^n     2^3373,     cannot  furnish  the  ground ;  for 

D^M  is  here  a  collective  term,  like  gens,  as  appears 
indubitably  from  Josh.  xv.  13,  where  we  have  the 
expression,   "  Kirjath-arba,   the    father    of   Anak 

(P33JPI  "OS),  which  is  Hebron."  The  Tetrapolis 
was  the  ancient  seat  of  powerful  tribes,  whom  the 
traditions  of  Israel  described  as  giants.  Similar 
tetrapolitan  cities  are  elsewhere  met  with.  The 
Indians  had  a  Kdturgrama,  the  Four  Villages 
(Lassen,  Ind.  Alterth.,  i.  72).  In  Phrygia,  Cibyra 
and  three  other  places  formed  a  Tetrapolis  (Strabo, 
lib.  xiii.  1,  17).  I  am  inclined  to  find  in  the  name 
Cibyra  the  same  idea  as  in  the  Arabic  Cheibar 3 
and  the  Hebrew  Chebron  (Hebron),  namely,  that 
of  confederation,  community  of  interest.  It  is  a 
suggestive  fact  that  Abraham's  expedition  is  joined 
by  the  brothers  Eshcol,  Aner,  and  Mamre  (Gen.  xiv. 
13) ;  concerning  Mamre  it  is  remarked,  "  the  same 
is  Hebron"  (Gen.  xxiii.  19).  The  Upper  City 
(Acropolis),  situated  upon  the  mountains,  and  the 
lower  cities  lying  in  the  fertile  valley  which  these 
mountains  inclose,  together  constituted  the  Tetrap- 
olis. At  the  present  day  the  city  in  the  valley  is 
still  divided  into  three  parts.4  Three  sons  of  Anak 
are  enumerated,  manifestly  three  tribes,  probably 
named  after  ancient  heroes,  which  tribes  coalesced 
with  the  mountain  city.5  As  late  as  the  time  of 
David,  the  phraseology  is,  that  he  dwelt  in  "the 
cities  of  Hebron"  (2  Sam.  ii.  3).  Probably  the 
name  Hebron  was  originally  given  to  the  moun- 
tain6 (the  "in  which  Caleb  claims,  Josh.  xiv.  12), 
as  forming  the  common  defense,  and  was  then  after 


the 


suppi 


■ession  of  the  Anakim,  transferred  to  the 


whole  city.  The  names  of  the  three  families  of 
Anakim  do  not  admit  of  any  certain  interpretation. 

I^TIH  might  with  most  probability  be  interpreted 
after  the  analogy  of  Achijah  (Ahijah  or  Ahiah) 
"  Friend  of  God."  MQ,  7?,  is  the  heathen  deity 
(Isa.  lxv.  11),  who  also  occurs  in  Phoenician  inscrip- 
tions, in  proper  names  like  ,  J3"T3i?,  "  servant  of 
Meni."     The  name  ^t?,  "  Sheshai,"  reminds  one 

of  the  Egyptian  king  pt£",t£7,  Shishak,  Sechon- 
chis,  who  made  war  on  Rehoboam  (1  Kgs.  xiv. 
25).     The  name  ~)?2Ipt»  ("  Sheshbazzar,"  Ezra 

3  Cf.  my  History  of  the  Jews,  in  Ersch  and  Gruber'i 
Eneyklopadie,  ii.  27,  p.  166. 

4  Robinson,  Bibl.  Res.,  ii.  74. 

5  In  a  manner  analogous  perhaps  to  the  fusion  of  the 
Ramnes,  Tities,  and  Luceres,  into  the  one  Roma  of  the 
Ramnes. 

6  Ritter  (xvi.  228  [Gage's  Transl.  iii.  301])  proves  that  the 
ancient  Hebron  lay  higher  than  the  present,  which  however 
can  refer  only  to  a  part  of  the  city.  The  great  importance 
of  the  place  is  explained  by  its  protected  situation  in  the 
mountains,  along  whose  slopes  it  extended  down  into  the 
valley.    That  fact  only  adapted  it  to  be  the  capital  of  Darfd'f 

kingdom.     Cf.  Josh.  xi.  21    ("liTf   }72). 


CHAPTER  I.   11-15. 


8* 


L  8)  may  also  be  compared.  The  third  name, 
Talmai,  leaves  it  doubtful  whether  it  is  to  be  taken 
primarily  as  the  Dame  of  a  place  or  of  a  person. 
Stephanus  Byzanu'nus  speaks  of  an  Arabic  place 
which  he  calls  Castle  ®e\anov£a.  It  is  possible, 
however,  that  analogous  mythical  ideas  come  into 
contact  with  each  other,  in  the  Greek  legend  con- 
cerning Salmoneus,1  father  of  Tyro,  and  husband 
of  Sidero.  Hesiod  already  (in  a  Fragment,  ed. 
Gottling.  p.  259)  calls  him  an  &5ikos  /ml  ujrept?t>u.os. 
Josephus  (Ant.  v.  2,  3)  says  that  the  Anakim  were 
a  race  of  giants,  "  whose  bones  are  still  shown  tu 
this  very  day."  What  stories  were  current  about 
the  discovery  of  gigantic  human  remains  in  Asia 
Minor  and  Syria,  may  be  learned  from  the  Heroica 
of  Fhilostratus  (ed.  Jacobs,  p.  28).  A  body  of 
gigantic  length  was  found  in  the  bed  of  the  Oron- 

l  Cf.  Heyne  on  Apollodorus,  i.  9,  p.  59.  The  later  Jews 
write  "Qyj?!  for  Ptolemy  Cf.  Ewald,  Gesck.  Israel's,  i. 
908,  3U.T  :  " 


tes.  It  was  thought  also  that  the  bodies  of  Orestei 
and  Ajax  had  been  seen.  The  faint-hearted  spies 
had  depicted  the  Anakim  as  Nephilim,  men  like 
the  prehistoric  Xibdungen  of  German  story ;  and 
from  this  Josephus  constructed  his  giant-tale. 

Josh.  xv.  14  remarks,  "  And  Caleb  drove  thence 
the  three  sons  of  Anak."  A  contradiction  lias 
been  found  therein  with  what  we  read  here,  "  And 
they  smote."  None  really  exists.  The  narrative 
is  actually  more  exact  than  is  generally  supposed. 
The  statement  of  Josh.  xv.  14  refers  to  Judges  i.  20. 
The  tribe  of  Judah  bad  now  indeed  taken  Hebron, 
and  conquered  the  Anakim ;  but  for  peaceable 
possession  the  time  had  not  yet  come.  Accom- 
panied by  Simeon,  Judah  proceeded  onward  to 
gain  possession  of  the  whole  territory.  At  Judg.  i. 
19  the  whole  campaign  is  finished.  Then  they  give 
Hebron  to  Caleb,  and  he  drives  out  whatever  re- 
mains of  the  Anakim.  It  was  not  with  three  per 
sons,  but  with  three  tribes  or  nations,  that  they 
had  to  do. 


Olhniel  takes  Kirjath-sepher,  and  wins  Achsah,  the  daughter  of  Caleb. 
Chapter    I.     11-15. 


11  And  from  thence  he   [i.  e.  Judah]  went  against  the   inhabitants  of  Debir  :  and  the 

12  name  of  Debir  before  icas  Kirjath-sepher  :     And  Caleb  said,    He  that   smiteth  Kir- 

13  jath  sepher,  and  taketh  it,  to  him  will  I  give  Achsah  my  daughter  to  wife.  And 
Othniel  the  son  of  Kenaz,  Caleb's  younger  brother,  took  it  :  and  he  gave  him  Achsah 

14  his  daughter  to  wife.  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  she  came  to  him  [at  her  coming; 
sat.  to  her  husband's  house],  that  she  moved  [urged]  him  to  ask  of  her  father  a  [the]  field  : 
and  she  lighted  from  off  her  ass  ;  and  Caleb  said  unto  her,   What  wilt  thou  [what  is 

15  the  matter  with  thee]  ?  And  she  said  unto  him,  Give  me  a  blessing  :  for  thou  hast 
given  me  a  south  land  [hast  given  me  away  into  a  dry  laud1]  ;  give  me  also  [therefore] 
springs  of  water.     And  Caleb  gave  her  the  upper  springs,  and  the  nether  spring-. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

LI  Ver.  16.  —  "On/" D  — -2H  "^H^  >^  :  Dr-  Cassel's  rendering  agrees  substantially  with  that  of  the  LXX.  and 
many  modern  critics.  Bertheau  says .  '"  223n  t^HS  is  the  accusative  of  place.  It  would  be  difficult  to  justify 
the  other  and  usual  rendering  grammatically,  since  7.HJ  with  the  accus.  suffix,  never,  not  even  Jer.  is.  1,  Isa.  xxvii. 
4.  means  to  give  anything  to  one."  Bachmauu,  however,  objects  that  "  7i""l2  does  not  occur  ot  the  giving  of  daugh- 
ters in  marriage,  and  that  the  absence  of  a  preposition,  say    vS,    before    t/"",S   would  make  a  hard  construction.    The 

■ufflx  *0  is  either  a  negligent  form  of  popular  speech,  substituted  for  **  ;  (cf.  Ewald,  Ausf.  Lekrb.  315  b),  or,  better,  a 
second  accus.,  such  as  is  quite  common  with  verbs  of  giving,  favoring,  etc.  (cf.  Ewald,  283  b).  and  from  which  rule 
]ri3    is  not  to  be  excepted,  cf,  Ezek.  xxi.  32." —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  1 1 .  And  he  went  against  Debir.  The 
position  of  Debir,  hitherto  unknown,  was  recog- 
nized not  long  since  by  Dr.  Rosen,  on  the  hill-top 
called  Deioirbdn,  near  the  spring  Ain  Nmtkur,  in  a 
southwestern  direction  from  Hebron,  between  that 


Kirjath-sannah  (n3D,  Josh.  xv.  49)  philological!; 

express  one  and  the  same  idea.  Furst  well  remarks 
(Lex.  s.  v.  TO?)  that  "  ~Q7  is  the  Phoenician 
equivalent  of  the  Hebrew'  "T.-^i  a  material  pre- 
pared from  the  skins  of  animals,  and  of  the 
place  and  Dura  (/jilschr.  der  Morgenl  Gesellschaft, '  Himvaritie  for  a  book  written  on  palm-leaves." 
1857,  ii.  50-64).  I  From  the  latter,  he  says,  the  Greek  5i^t)€po  was 

The  name  of  Debir  was  formerly  Kirjath- 1  formed,  and  thus  the  "word  passed  over  to  the 
sepher.  In  my  Ortsnamen  (i.  116,  note),  I  already  i  Greeks  and  Persians.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt 
endeavored  to  show  that  Debir,  Kirjath-sepher,  and    that  the  name  describes  the  citv  as  a  depository  of 


34 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


jvritten  traditions,  book-rolls.  Kirjath-sepher1  was 
a  Palestinian  Hermopolis,  city  of  Thoth,  where 
literature  had  its  seat  (cf.  Plutarch,  De  Isid.,  ed. 
Parthey,  p.  4 ;  the  Sept.  translates,  tt6Kis  tuv 
ypafi/iaTaiv).  Such  depositories,  where  the  sacred 
writings  were  kept  iv  kiVtt;,  in  a  chest  (Pint.  /.  c), 
for  preservation,  were  common  to  the  religion  of  the 
Egyptians,  Phoenicians,  and  Babylonians.  To  this 
place,  that  which  sheltered  the  sacred  ark  of  Israel's 
divine  law  opposed  itself.  It  was  therefore  of  much 
consequence  to  conquer  it,  as  on  the  other  hand 
its  inhabitants  valiantly  defended  it.  The  different 
names  testify  of  the  different  dialects  of  the  tribes 
who  have  held  Uebir. 

Ver.  12.  And  Caleb  said,  He  that  smiteth 
Kirjath-sepher.  Caleb  is  the  chief  of  the  tribe  of 
Judah.  Hebron  has  fallen  to  him  as  his  inherit- 
ance, but  it  does  not  circumscribe  his  eager  in- 
terest. "  Caleb  said."  His  personal  zeal  is  the 
more  prominently  indicated,  because  displayed  in 
a  matter  which  involved  the  general  cause,  the 
honor  of  the  whole  tribe.  At  the  conquest  of  He- 
bron, the  phrase  was,  "  and  they  smote;"  at  the 
next  battle,  fought  lor  Debir,  it  is,  "  Caleb  said." 
As  the  whole  tribe  assisted  in  gaining  his  personal 
inheritance,  so  for  the  honor  of  the  tribe  he  de- 
votes that  which  was  wholly  his,  and  his  alone. 
He  offers  the  dearest  possession  he  has,  as  a  prize 
for  him  who  shall  storm  and  take  the  strong 
mountain  fortress  and  seat  of  idolatry.  It  is  his 
only  daughter  (cf.  1  Chron.  ii.  49)  Achsah,  born 
to  him  in  advancing  years.  He  can  offer  nothing 
better.  Stronger  proof  of  his  zeal  for  the  cause  of 
Israel  he  cannot  give.  To  obtain  the  daughter  of 
a  house  by  meritorious  actions  has  in  all  ages  been 
a  worthy  object  of  ambition  set  before  young  and 
active  men.  It  was  only  by  a  warlike  exploit  that 
1  >avid  obtained  Michal  who  loved  him.  The 
Messenian  hero  Aristomenes  bestows  a  similar  re- 
ward. When  a  country  maiden  rescued  him,  with 
heroic  daring,  from  danger  involving  his  life,  he 
gave  her  his  son  for  a  husband  (Pans.  iv.  19J.  The 
conquest  of  Uebir  is  therefore  especially  mentioned 
to  the  honor  of  Caleb  and  his  love  for  Israel.  The 
event  was  a  glorious  incident  in  the  hero's  family 
history. 

Ver.  13.  And  Othniel,  the  son  of  Kenaz,  a 
younger  brother  of  Caleb,  took  it.  Israel,  the 
nation,  was  divided  into  tribes,  these  into  families, 
these  into  "  houses,"  and  these  again  into  single 
households.  This  may  be  clearly  seen  from  the 
story  of  Achan  (Josh.  vii.  14ff.|.  Achan  was  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah,  the  family  of  Zerah,  the  house  of 
Zabdi,  and  the  son  of  Carmi.  So  Caleb  was  the  son 
of  Jephunneh,  of  the  house  of  Kenaz :  whence, 
Num.  xxxii.  12,  he  is  called  the  Kenezite.  Ber- 
theau  (pp.  21,  22)  labors  under  a  peculiar  error,  in 
that  he  confounds  the  family  of  the  Kenezite  in  the 

1  Attention  was  again  directed  to  the  city  from  the  fact 
that  the  first  liturgical  poet  of  the  modern  Jews,  Kalir, 
designates  a  Kirjath-sepher  as  his  native  place.  He  does 
not,  however,  mean  this  city,  but.  playing  on  the  word,  he 
translates  KoAAtppoTj  in  Palestine  by  Kirjath  Sliei'htr,  i.  ?. 
Beautiful  City.  This  opinion  advanced  by  me  in  1845 
{Fmnkd's  Zeitschr.)  has  perhaps  lost  none  of  its  prob- 
ahilitv. 

2  [The  above  view  of  the  relationship  between  Caleb  and 
Lhluiiel  is  held  by  most  modern  critics.  Amoug  its  oppo- 
ueuts,  however,  are  Ewald  and  De  Wette.  The  former  (  Gfsch. 
Israels,  ii.  .374)  deems  it  "  more  suitable,  in  accordance  with 
■  he  view  cf  the  oldeat  narrator,  to  take  Kenaz  as  the  younger 
brotner  of  Caleb  ;  "  the  latter,  in  his  excellent  German 
Version,    translates  :   "  Othniel,   der    Stthn    des    Ktnas,    'Its 

ungitltn    Bmrten    Calebs."     Of   ancient  versions,   the  Tar- 


I  tribe  of  Judah  with  the  hostile  people  of  the  same 
I  name  mentioned  Gen.  xv.  19.  It  is  true,  Lengerke 
(Kenaan,  p.  204)  and  others  preceded  Um  in  this | 
Hitter  also  (Erdkunde,  xv.  138  [Gage's  Transl.  ii. 
146])  has  allowed  himself  to  be  misled  by  it.  But 
a  consideration  of  the  important  relations  in  which 
Caleb  stands  to  the  people  of  God,  would  alone 
have  authorized  the  presumption  that  he  could 
have  no  connection  with  a  people  that  was  to  lie 
driven  out  before  Israel.  In  addition  to  this, 
notice  should  have  been  taken  of  the  isolated 
position  of  the  Kenites,  continuing  down  to  a  late 
period ;  for  notwithstanding  the  peaceful  conduct 
of  this  people,  and  their  attachment  to  Israel,  their 
historical  derivation  from  the  father-in-law  of  Moses 
is  never  forgotten.  The  adoption  of  the  celebrated 
hero  into  the  tribe  of  Judah  must  at  all  events 
have  been  explained.  But  there  is  absolutely  no 
foundation  for  any  such  assumption  as  that  in 
question.  The  similarity  of  names  affords  so 
much  :he  less  occasion,  since  the  same  names  were 
frequently  borne  by  heathen  and  Israelites,  and 
also  by  families  in  the  different  tribes  of  Israel. 
One  Edomite  is  named  Kenaz,  like  the  ancestor  of 
Caleb  ;  another  Saul,  like  the  king  of  Israel ;  a 
third  Elah,  like  a  man  of  Benjamin  (Gen.  xxxvi. 
41  ;  1  Kgs.  iv.  18).     There  is  an  alien  tribe  named 

s"1in ;   but  no  one  imagines  that  Israelites  of  the 

name  "^f"!  are  to  be  reckoned  to  it.  The  name 
of  the  king  of  Lachish  whom  Joshua  defeated,  was 
Japhia,  exactly  like  that  of  a  son  of  David  (2  Sam. 
v.  15).  Hezron  and  Carmi,  both  families  of 
Reuben,  are  such  also  in  the  tribe  of  Judah.  The 
name  Jephunneh  is  borne  also  by  a  man  of  the 
tribe  of  Asher  (1  Chron.  vii.  38).  To  this  must 
be  added  that  the  Book  of  Chronicles  traces  the 
family  of  Caleb  more  in  detail,  and  places  them 
as  relatives  alongside  of  Nahshon,  the  progenitor 
of  David  (1  Chron.  ii.  9  seq.).  Caleb  is  the  son  of 
Jephunneh,  of  the  house  of  Kenaz.  Othniel  is  his 
brother.  That  the  latter  is  not  designated  "  son 
of  Jephunneh,"  is  because  he  is  sufficiently  distin- 
guished by  means  of  his  more  illustrious  brother. 
That  he  is  styled  "  son  of  Kenaz,"  is  to  intimate 
that  he  is  full  brother  to  the  son  of  Jephunneh, 
belonging  to  the  same  stock ;  not,  as  might  be,  the 
son  of  Caleb's  mother,  by  a  husband  from  some 
other  family.  He  is  so  much  younger  than  Caleb, 
that  the  latter  may  be  regarded  as  his  second  father, 
who  had  watched  over  him  from  youth  up.  Whj 
we  are  here,  where  the  narrative  is  so  personal  in 
its  character,  to  think  only  of  genealogical,  not  of 
physical  relationships,  as  Bertheau  supposes,  it  is 
difficult  to  perceive.  Just  here,  this  would  destroy, 
not  merely  the  historical  truth,  but  also  the  assthetic 
character,  of  the  narrative.2 

Ver.  14.     And  it  came  to  pass  at  her  coming. 

gum  and  Peshito  leave  the  question  undecided.  The  LXX. 
in  C.  Vat.,  in  all  three  passages,  and  in  C.  Alex,  at  Josh, 
xv.  IT  and  Judg.  iii.  9,  makes  Othniel  the  nephew,  while 
in  Judg.  i.  13  C.  Alex,  makes  him  the  brother,  of  Caleb 
The  Vulg.  invariably  :  "  Otboniel  Alius  Cenez,  frater  Caleb." 
!  Grammatically,  both  constructions  are  equally  admissible. 
For  that  adopted  by  Dr.  Cassel,  cf.  Gen.  xxviii.  5  :  1  Sam. 
xxvi.  6,  etc.  ;  for  the  other.  Gen  xxiv.  10  ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  3, 
etc.  That  the  distinctive  accent  over  Kenaz  is  not  incom- 
patible with  either  construction,  or  rather  does  not  commit 
the  Masorites  to  the  construction  adopted  by  Dr.  Cassel.  as 
Keil  intimates,  may  be  seen  from  Gen.  xxiv.  15,  etc. 

Bachmann  favors  the  alternate  rendering  —  "filius  Ke- 
nasi  fratris  Calebi "  —  on  the  following  grounds:  1.  "The 
fact  that  elsewhere  Caleb  is  always  designated  as  T  the  son 
of  Jephunneh,1'  while  Othniel  is  always   6poken  of  as  'f  the 


CHAPTER  I.   11-14. 


85 


Othniel  had  conquered  the  stronghold,  —  the  victory 
was  his,  and  Caleb  gave  him  his  daughter.  The 
narrator  forthwith  adds  an  incident  that  marked 
the  peaceful  entrance  of  the  young  wife  into  the 
house  of  her  husband,  and  afforded  an  interesting 
glimpse  of  her  character.  Caleb,  the  head  of  the 
tribe,  was  rich ;  to  him,  and  to  liim  alone,  the  fine 
fields  and  estates  about  Hebron  had  been  given. 
Only  Caleb,  the  son  of  Jephunneh,  had  received 
them,  not  the  whole  family  (Josh.  xxi.  12). 
Othniel  was  poor.  In  the  character  of  a  poor, 
younger  son,  he  had  achieved  heroic  deeds.  Not 
he  thinks  of  goods  and  possessions ;  but  so  much 
the  more  does  the  young  Aehsah,  who  has  been 
accustomed  to  wealth.  Such  is  the  course  of  the 
world.  They  are  on  their  way  to  Hebron,  a  way 
which  leads  through  fertile,  well-watered  fields. 
Their  journey  is  a  beautiful  triumphal  procession, 
over  which  the  aged  father  rejoices.     Aehsah  urges 

pi"TrPD£11  from  i"TO)  her  husband  to  seize  the 
opportunity,  and  petition  her  father  for  the  noble 
field  through  which  they  are  passing.1  He  does  it 
not.  He  deems  it  an  act  unworthy  of  himself.  She, 
however,  like  a  true  woman,  too  sagacious  to  lose 
the  proper  moment,  proceeds  herself  ingeniously  to 
call  her  father's  attention  to  the  fact  that  she 
desires  not  merely  honor,  but  also  property.  She 
slides    from    her   ass  —  suddenly,   as    if   she   fell 

(TO^ril)  —  so  that  her  father  asks,  "  What  is  the 
matter  with  thee  ?  "  Her  answer  has  a  double 
Bense  :  "  Thou  gavest  me  away  into  a  dry  land, 
give   me   also  springs."     0   give   me  a   blessing ! 

223n  Y~}$  ("land  of  the  south")  is  land  desti- 
tute of  water.  No  greater  blessing  there  than 
springs.  They  make  the  parched  field  flourishing 
and  productive  (cf.  Ps.  exxvi.  4).  Now,  just  as 
springs  are  a  sign  of  abundance  and  wealth,  so 
negeb  is  a  symbol  of  indigence  and  want.  Thou 
gavest  me  away,  says  Aehsah,  in  words  full  of  con- 
cealed  meaning,  into  a  dryland  —  to  a  poor  hus- 
band; give  me  also  springs  to  enrich  the  land  — 
my  husband.  Caleb  understood  and  gave,  the 
more  liberally,  no  doubt,  for  the  ingenious  manner 
in  which  she  asked.     He  gave  her  the  upper  and 

lower  springs.  flv2,  for  springs,  occurs  only  in 
this  passage.  It  is  obviously  not  to  be  derived  from 
773.  in  the  sense  of  rolling,  turning,  —  from  which 

comes  i"^2)  "pitcher,"  so  named  on  account  of  its 
round  form,  —  but  is  connected  with  old  roots  ex- 
pressive, like  the  Sanskr.  gala,  "water,"  of  welling, 
bubbling    (cf.    Dieffenbach,     Worterb.    der    Goth. 

son  of  Kenaz,"  raises  a  presumption  against  the  supposition 
that  Othniel  is  the  brother  of  Caleb  in  the  strict  sense  of  the 

term 2.  Caleb  was  85  years  old  when  Hebron 

was  bestowed  on  him  (Josh.  xiv.  10,  14);  and  when  he  took 
possession  of  it,  must  have  been  some  years  older.  Accord- 
ingly, if  Othniel  was  his  brother,  even  though  his  junior  by 
from  twenty  to  thirty  years,  —  and  a  greater  difference  in 
age  is  surely  not  to  be  supposed,  —  it  would  follow,  that  the 
bold  hero  who  won  his  wife  as  a  prize  for  storming  Debir 
was  at  that  time  from  sixty  to  seventy  years  of  age  ;  that 
about  eighteen  years  later,  he  entered  on  his  office  as  Judge 
as  a  man  of  full  eighty  years*of  age  ;  and  that,  even  though 
he  died  some  time  before  the  end  of  the  forty  years'  rest 
(ch.  iii.  11),  he  reached  an  age  of  120  years  or  more,  which 
is  scarcely  probable.  3.  According  to  ch.  iii.  9,  Othniel  is 
the  first  deliverer  of  Israel  fallen  under  the  yoke  of  heathen 
oppressors  in  consequence  of  its  apostasy  to  heathen  idola- 
try. Now,  since  idolatry  is  said  to  have  become  prevalent 
In  Israel  only  after  the  generation  that  had  entered  Canaan 
with  Joshua  and  Caleb  had  died  ofT(ch.  ii.  10),  it  is  clear 
hat  Othniel  is  regarded  as  belonging  not  to  this,  but  to  the 


Sprache,  i.  183).  What  springs  they  were  which 
Othniel  received,  it  is  difficult  to  say.  Were  they 
those  which  Robinson  found  on  the  way  to  Hebron, 
within  an  hour's  distance  !  Le  Clerc  wonders  why 
this  family  history  is  here  related.  Most  certainly 
not  without  intending  to  make  the  zeal  of  Caleb, 
the  unselfishness  of  Othniel,  and  the  prudence  of 
Aehsah,  points  of  instruction.  The  Jewish  exege- 
sis, reproduced  by  Raschi,  is  essentially  right,  when 
it  explains  that  Othniel  was  poor  in  everything  but 
the  law,  in  everything,  that  is,  but  piety  and  solidity 
of  character.2  History  and  tradition  present  many 
another  pair  like  Othniel  and  Aehsah.  The  thing 
to  be  especially  noted,  however,  is  the  firmness  of 
Othniel  in  resisting  his  wife's  enticement  to  make 
requests  which  it  is  more  becoming  in  her  to  make. 
Not  many  men  have  so  well  withstood  the  ambi- 
tious and  eagerly  craving  projects  of  their  wives 


HOMILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

Compare  Horn.  Hints  on  ch.  i.  17-20. 

[Scott  ;  It  is  a  very  valuable  privilege  to  b« 
closely  united  with  families  distinguished  for  faith 
and  piety ;  and  to  contract  marriage  with  those 
who  have  been  "  trained  up  in  the  nurture  and  ad- 
monition of  the  Lord." 

The  same  ;  Nature  teaches  us  to  desire  tem- 
poral benefits  for  our  children  ;  but  grace  will  teach 
us  to  be  far  more  desirous  and  earnest  in  using 
means  that  they  may  be  partakers  of  spiritual 
blessings. 

The  same  :  If  affection  to  a  creature  animates 
men  to  such  strenuous  efforts  and  perilous  adven- 
tures, what  will  the  love  of  God  our  Saviour  do,  if 
it  bear  rule  in  our  hearts  ? 

The  same  :  If  earthly  parents,  "  being  evil, 
know  how  to  give  good  gifts  to  their  children,  how 
much  more  will  our  Heavenly  Father  give  good 
things  to  those  who  ask  him  !  " 

Henry  :  From  this  story  we  learn,  1st.  That 
it  is  no  breach  of  the  tenth  commandment  moder 
ately  to  desire  those  comforts  and  conveniences  of 
this  life  which  we  see  attainable  in  a  fair  and  regu- 
lar way 3dly.  That  parents  must  never 

think  that  lost,  which  is  bestowed  on  their  children 
for  their  real  advantage,  but  must  be  free  in  giving 
them  portions  as  well  as  maintenance,  especially 
when  dutiful. 

P.  H.  S. :  Three  Lessons  from  an  Ancient 
Wedding :  1 .  Caleb's  lesson  :  Pious  zeal  for  God 
and  an  heroic  character  are  better  than  wealth  or 
social  rank.  To  such  as  possess  these  qualities  let 
fathers  freely  give  their  daughters.  2.  Othniel's 
succeeding  generation,  which  agrees  better  with  the  hypoth 
esis  that  he  is  the  son  of  a  younger  brother  of  Caleb,  than 
that  be  is  such  a  brother  himself.  4.  Finally,  whatever,  in 
view  of  Lev.  xviii.  12,  13.  may  be  thought  of  the  difficulty 
of  a  marriage  between  an  uncle  and  a  niece,  that  interpreta- 
tion surely  deserves  to  be  preferred  which,  while  it  is  possi 
ble  in  itself,  does  not  raise  the  said  difficulty  at  all  "  —  Tr  1 

1  [Wordsworth  :  ''  The  field  :  that  is,  the  field  which  had 
been  given  to  Othniel  when  the  Book  of  Judges  was  written 
and  which  was  known  to  be  well  supplied  with  water. 
This  explanation  of  the  article  supposes  that  the  words 
attributed  to  Aehsah  in  the  text,  were  not  the  very  words 
she  used.  —  Tr.] 

2  At  an  early  date,  the  passage  1  Chrou.  iv.  10.  where 
Jabez  says,  "  Oh,  that  thou  wouldest  bless  me  indeed,  and 
enlarge  my  coast,  and  that  thine  hand  might  be  with  me," 
was  already  explained  as  referring  to  Othniel  (cf.  Temuray 
p.  16,  a).  Jerome  was  acquainted  with  a  Jewish  opinion 
according  to  which  Jabez  was  a  teacher  of  the  law  (ct.  1 
Chron.  ii.  65),  who  instructed  the  sons  of  the  Kenite.  ff 
Qiutst    Htbr.  in  Lib.  i.  Parol.,  ed.  Migne,  iii.  1370 


36 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


lesson  :  A  wife  is  to  be  won  for  her  own  sake,  r.Dt 
as  the  means  of  gaining  access  to  her  father's 
wealth.  3.  Achsah's  lesson  :  It  is  the  wife's  duty 
to  promote  the  interests  and  honor  of  her  husband. 
Wealth  is  a  source  of  weight  and  influence,  and  a 
means  of  usefulness.  Who  knows  how  much  this 
and  similar  thoughtful  acts  of  Achsah  contributed 
to  shape  the  subsequent  life-work  of  Othniel  as 
judge  of  Israel. 

The   same  :   It  is  more   honorable   to  woman 
to  be  "sold"  (a  term  entirely  inapplicable,  how- 


ever, to  the  case  in  hand),  than  to  have  a  husbanc 
bought  for  her  by  her  father's  gold  or  lands.  When 
a  man  stormed  the  walls  of  a  stronghold,  or  slew 
an  hundred  Philistines  by  personal  prowess,  or  paid 
fourteen  years  of  responsible  service,  for  a  wife,  01 
when,  as  in  the  days  of  chivalry,  he  ran  tilts  and 
courted  dangers  in  her  behalf,  however  grotesque 
the  performance,  it  indicated  not  only  solidity  of 
character  in  the  wooer,  but  also  a  true  and  manly 
respect  for  woman,  which  is  not  possessed  by  ai] 
men  of  modern  days. —  Tb.] 


The  Kenites  take  %vp  their  abode  in  the  territories  of  Judah. 

Chapter   I.  16. 

16  And  the  children  [sons]  of  the  Kenite,  Moses'  father-in-law,  went  up  out  of 
[from]  the  city  of  palm-trees  with  the  children  [sons]  of  Judah  into  the  wilderness 
of  Judah,  which  lieth  in  the  south  of  Arad  ;  and  they  [he  *]  went  and  dwelt  among  * 
the  people. 

TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  16.  —  He,  i.  e.,  the  Kenite.     The  subject  of  ?[/?*]  is  "O'p,  the  Kenite,  collective  term  for  the  tribe.  —  Te.] 

[2  Ver.  16.  —  J""IW,  with,  near,  the  people,  but  still  in  settlements  of  their  own,  cf.  ver.  21.    Dr.  Cassel's  unter  answer* 
tc  the  English  among.  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  16.  And  the  sons  of  the  Kenite,  Moses' 
father-in-law.  Kenite  is  the  name  of  a  heathen 
tribe,  which  in  Gen.  xv.  19  is  enumerated  among 
the  nations  hostile  to  Israel.  In  the  vision  of 
Balaam  it  is  mentioned  in  connection  with  Amalek 
(Num.  xxiv.  21).     It  is  there  said  of  the   tribe, 

"  In  the  rock  hast  thou  put  thy  nest "  (^ipi?,    from 

1|7,  "  nest").  "  Strong,"  indeed,  "  is  their  dwell- 
ing-place." The  Kenites  were  a  tribe  of  the  wil- 
derness, troglodytes,  who  dwelt  in  the  grottoes 
which  abound  everywhere  in  Palestine,  but  espe- 
cially in  its  southern  parts.  Barth,  in  1847,  saw 
caves  at  the  lower  Jordan,  "high  up  in  the  steep 
face  of  the  precipitous  rock,  on  the  left,  inhabited 
by  human  beings  and  goats,  though  it  is  impossible 
to  see  how  they  get  there"  (Ritter,  xv.  465).  At 
the  Dead  Sea,  Lynch  discovered  grottoes  in  the 
rocks,  the  entrance  to  which,  in  spite  of  all  profi- 
ciency in  climbing,  could  not  be  found.     The  name 

of  the  tribe,  Kenites,  is  doubtless  derived  from  ]i2, 

1  Earlier  scholars  (Le  Clerc,  Lightfoot,  Opera,  ii.  581)  were 
already  struck  by  the  Targum's  constant  substitution  of 

riS^^ti?,    Salmaah  for  Kenite.     In  this  passage  also  it 

reads,  ''  the  sons  of  Salmaah."  Even  Jewish  authors  were 
ftt  a  loss  how  to  explain  this.  As  it  affords  a  specimen  of 
the  traditional  exegesis  of  the  Jews,  already  current  in  the 
larguin  on  this  passage,  I  will  here  set  down  the  explanation 
of  this  substitution :  The  Kenite  of  our  passage  is  identified 
with  the  Kinim  of  1  Chron.  ii.  55,  who  are  there  described 
u  "  the  families  of  the  Sopherim.''  But  how  came  the  Ke- 
nites to  hold  this  office,  in  after  times  so  highly  honored,  and 
filled  by  men  learned  in  the  law  (cf.  Scsnhedrin,  p.  104  a  and 
106  a) '     The  father-in-law  of  Mose?  —  (tradition  makes  him 


which  means  an  elevated  hiding-place  in  the  rocks, 
as  well  as  a  nest.  The  term  troglodytes,  likewise, 
comes  from  rpwyKri,  "grotto,"  and  is  applied  to 
both  birds  and  human  beings.  As  Jeremiah  (xlix. 
16)  exclaims,  "  though  thou  shouldest  make  thy 
nest  as  high  as  the  eagle,"  so  jEschylus  ( Choe'phoroe, 
249)  calls  the  nest  of  the  eagle's  brood,  o-K-l]vntia, 
"  dwelling-place." 

It  is  from  this  passage,  and  from  ch.  iv.  11,  that 
we  first  leant  that  Jethro,  the  father-in-law  of 
Moses,1  belonged  to  one  of  the  Kenite  families. 
Moses,  when  a  fugitive  in  the  desert,  found  an  asy- 
lum and  a  wife  in  the  retirement  of  Jethro 's  house- 
hold. From  that  time,  this  family,  without  losing 
its  independent  and  separate  existence,  was  closely 
allied  with  all  Israel.  But  it  was  only  this  family, 
and  not  the  whole  Kenite  nation,  that  entered  into 
this  alliance.  Else,  how  could  the  Kenite  be  named 
among  enemies  in  the  prophetic  announcements  of 
Gen.  xv.,  and  with  Amalek  in  the  vision  of  Ba- 
laam 1  Moreover,  the  text  clearly  intimates  that 
the  sons  of  the  Kenite  adhered  to  Israel,  not  as 
Kenites,  but  as  descendants  of  Jethro,  the  father- 
flee  from  the  council  of  Pharaoh  of  which  he  was  a  member. 
Sola,  11  a)  —  is  the  Kenite  who,  when  the  latter  wandered 
in  the  desert  (Ex.  ii.  20,  21),  gave  him  bread  (lechem)  and  also, 
through  his  daughter,  a  house  (bet/i).  Now,  the  same  chap- 
ter of  Chronicles,  vers.  51,  54,  names  a  certain  Sa/rna,  and 
styles  him  the  rt  father  of  Eeth-lechem."  The  father  of  this 
"  Bread-house  "  is  then  identified  with  Jethro.  Consequently, 
the  sons  of  the  Kenite  are  the  sons  of  Salmaah,  and  thus  their 
name  itself  indicates  how  they  attained  to  the  dignity  ac- 
corded them.  The  Targum  on  Chronicles  (ed.  Wilna,  1S36 
p.  3,  A)  expresses  it  thus  :  "  They  were  the  sons  of  Zippora 
who  (in  their  capacity  of  Sopherbrt)  enjoyed,  together  with 
the  families  of  the  Levites,  the  glory  of  having  descended 
from  Moses,  the  teacher  of  Israel." 


CHAPTER   I.    17-20. 


37 


In-law  of  Moses.1  It  is  the  constant  aim  of  the 
historian  of  the  conquest  of  Canaan  by  Israel,  to 
show  that  every  promise  was  fulfilled,  and  that  no  one 
who  at  ant/  time  snowed  kindness  failed  of  his  promised 
reward.  'Caleb's  constancy  and  courage  found  their 
long-promised  inheritance  in  Hebron.  A  recom- 
pense had  also  been  promised  to  the  sons  of  the 
Kenite-  When  Israel  was  on  its  journey  through 
the  desert  (Num.  x.  31),  and  Hobab  (on  the  name, 
see  below,  on  ch.  iv.  11)  desired  to  return  to  his 
old  place  of  abode.  Moses  said :  "  Leave  us  not ; 
thou  knowest  our  places  of  encampment  in  the  des 
ert,  and  hast  been  to  us  instead  of  eyes.  If  thou  go 
with  us,  every  good  thing  with  which  God  blesses 
us,  we  will  share  with  thee."  The  fulfillment  of 
this  promise  now  takes  place.  The  Kenites  enter 
with  the  tribe  of  Judah  into  the  inheritance  of  the 
latter,  as  into  a  domain  in  which  they  had  always 
been  at  home.  They  share  in  the  blessing  bestowed 
by  God  on  Israel. 

They  went  up  from  the  City  of  Palms.  No 
other  place  than  the  plain  of  Jericho  is  ever  called 
the  City  of  Palms  in  the  Scriptures.  Although  the 
city  was  destroyed,  the  palm-groves  still  existed. 
How  was  it  possible  to  suppose,-  in  the  face  of  Deut. 
xxxiv.  3  and  Judg.  iii.  13,  that  here  suddenly,  with- 
out any  preparatory  notice,  another  City  of  Palms 
is  referred  to !  The  statement  here  made,  so  far 
from  occasioning  difficulties,  only  testifies  to  the 
exactness  of  the  narrator.  Judah's  camp  was  in 
Gilgal,  whence  they  marched  through  Bezek  against 
the  enemy,  and  then  to  Hebron.  Gilgal  lay  in  the 
vicinity  of  Jericho.  When  the  tribe  decamped, 
the  Kenite  was  unwilling  to  remain  behind.  On 
the  march  through  the  desert,  their  position  as 
guides  had  of  course  always  been  in  the  van,  and, 
therefore,  with  the  tribe  of  Judah.  They  desire  to 
enjoy  their  reward  also  in  connection  with  this 
tribe,  and  hence  the  palms  of  overthrown  Jericho 
cannot  detain  them.  The  region  in  which  they 
were,  can  therefore  be  no  other  place  of  palms  than 
that  from  which  Judah  broke  up,  namely,  Jericho. 
In  fact,  the  statement  that  they  came  from  Jericho, 
proves  the  correctness  of  the  view  given  above,  that 
Gilgal  was  the  place  from  which  Judah  set  out  to 
enter  his  territory. 

Into  the  wilderness  of  Judah,  which  lieth  in 

1  This  view  does  away  with  all  those  questions  of  which, 
after  earlier  expositors,  Bertheau  treats  on  pp.  24,  25. 

2  Into  this  error,  Le  Clerc  has  misled  later  expositors,  and 
among  them,  Bertheau,  p.  25.  However,  the  wholly  irrele- 
vant passage  of  Diodorus  (iii.  42),  frequently  cited  to  justify 
the  assumption  of  another  City  of  Palms,  was  already  aban- 
doned by  Rosenmiiller,  p.  24. 

8  Iflliak  Chelo,  the  author  of  Les  chemins  de  Jerusalem,  in 
the  14th  century,  found  Arad  sparsely  Inhabited,  by  poor 


the  south  of  Arad.  But  why  is  the  narrative  of 
the  Kenite  expedition  here  introduced?  It  is  a 
peculiarity  of  Hebrew  narrators,  that  they  weave 
in  episodes  like  this  and  that  of  Othniel  and  Achsah, 
whenever  the  progress  of  the  history,  coming  into 
contact  with  the  place  or  person  with  which  they 
are  associated,  offers  an  occasion.  Hence  we  al- 
ready find  events  communicated  in  the  15th  chap- 
ter of  Joshua,  which  occurred  at  a  later  date,  but 
of  which  the  author  was  reminded  while  speaking 
of  the  division  of  the  land.  The  history  of  the  con- 
quest of  their  territory  by  Judah  is  very  brief. 
Pirst,  the  mountain  district  of  Hebron  and  the 
northeastern  part  of  the  territory  was  taken  posses- 
sion of.  Then,  according  to  the  plan  laid  down  ver 
9,  they  turned  to  the  south.  Of  this  part  of  their 
undertaking  no  details  are  given  ;  but  as  they  were 
getting  possession  of  the  land  in  this  direction,  they 
came  to  Arad,  where  it  pleased  the  Kenites  to  take 
up  their  abode,  in  close  relations  with  Judah.  A 
king  formerly  reigned  at  Arad,  who  attacked  Israel 
when  journeying  in  the  desert  (Num.  xxi.  1),  and 
was  defeated  by  Moses.  A  king  of  Arad  was  also 
conquered  by  Joshua  (Josh.  xii.  14).  After  its 
occupancy  by  the  tribe  of  Judah,  the  Kenites  re- 
sided there.  The  position 3  of  the  place  has  been 
accurately  determined  by  Robinson  (Bib.  Res.  ii- 
101,  cf.  Ritter,  xiv.  121).  Eusebius  and  Jerome 
had  placed  it  twenty  Roman  miles,  a  camel's  jour 
ney  of  about  eight  hours,  from  Hebron.  This 
accords  well  with  the  position  of  the  present  Tell 
'Arad,  "  a  barren-looking  eminence  rising  aboVe  the 
country  around."  Prom  this  fragmentary  notice 
of  the  place,  we  may  perhaps  infer  what  it  was  that 
specially  attracted  the  Kenites.  If  these  tribes 
were  attached  to  the  Troglodyte  mode  of  life,  the 
Arabs  still  told  Robinson  of  a  "  cavern "  found 
there.  The  Kenites  still  held  this  region  in  the 
time  of  David ;  for  from  the  vicinage  of  the  places 
named  in  1  Sam.  xxx.  29  ff.,  especially  Hormah, 
it  appears  that  they  are  those  to  whom  as  friends 
he  makes  presents.*  It  is  true,  that  when  the  ter- 
rible war  between  Saul  and  Amalek  raged  in  this 
region,  Saul,  lest  he  should  strike  friend  with  foe, 
caused  them  to  remove  (1  Sam.  xv.  6).  After  the 
victory,  they  must  have  returned  again. 

Arabs  and  Jews,  who  lived  of  their  flocks.  The  Rabbi  tends 
his  sheep,  and  at  the  same  time  gives  instruction  to  his  pu- 
pils. Cf.  Carmoly,  Itineraires  de  la  Ttrre  Sainte  (Bruxelles, 
1847),  pp.  244,  245. 

4  Cf.  1  Sam.  xxvii.  10,  where  the  same  local  position  is 
assigned  to  the  Kenites,  and  spoken  of  by  David  as  the  scene 
of  his  incursions,  in  order  to  make  the  suspicious  Philistines 
believe  that  he  injures  the  friends  of  Israel 


Simeon's  territory  is  conquered,  and  Judah  takes  the  Philistine  cities. 
Chapter  I.  17-20. 


17  And  Judah  went  with  Simeon  his  brother,  and  they  slew  [smote]  the  Canaanittsa 
that  inhabited  Zephath,  and  utterly  destroyed  it  [executed  the  ban  upon  it].1     And 

18  the  name  of  the  city  was  called  2  Hormah.     Also  [And]  Judah  took  Gaza  with  the 
coast  [territory]  thereof,  and  Askelon  with  the  coast  [territory]  thereof,  and  Ekron 

19  with  the  coast  [territory]  thereof.     And  the  Lerd  [Jehovah]  was  with   Judah  ;  f. 


38 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


and  he  drave  out  the  inhabitants  [obtained  possession]  of  the  mountain  [mountains] 
but  could  not  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  the  valley  [for  the  inhabitants  of  the  low 
country  were  not  to  be  driven  out],3  because  they  had  chariots  of  iron.     And  they 
gave  Hebron  unto  Caleb,  as  Moses  [had]  said :  and  he  expelled  thence  the  three  sons 
of  Anak. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 


20 


[1  Ver.  17.  —  The  Din  (LXX.  avaBe^a),  in  cases  like  the  preseDt,  was,  as  Hengstenberg  {Pent.  ii.  74)  expresses  it, 
,f  the  compulsory  devoteinent  to  the  Lord  of  those  who  would  not  voluntarily  devote  themselves  to  him."  To  render  the 
word  simply  by  K  destruction,'-  as  is  done  in  the  A.  V.  here  and  elsewhere,  is  to  leave  out  the  religious  element  of  the  act, 
and  reduce  it  to  the  level  of  a  common  war  measure.  Cf.  Winer,  Realwbrterb.,s.  v.  Bann  ;  Smith's  Bib.  Diet.  s.  v.  Anathe- 
ma. —  Te.] 

[2  Ver.  17.  —  S"1!"?*!.    Dr.  Cassel  translates  it  as  if  it  were  plural,  and  gives  it  the  same  subject  with  ^^PP^, 

rc  they  called."  Correct,  perhaps,  as  to  fact,  but  grammatically  less  accurate  than  the  A.  V.  S^P^I  is  the  indefinite 
third  person.     Cf.  Ges.  Gr.  137,  3.  —  Te.] 

[S  Ver.  19.  — Dr.  Cassel :  denn  nicht  zu  vertreiben  waren  die  Bewohntr  der  Niederung.  On  the  force  of  ^3,  for(E.  V 
but),  cf.  Ges.  Gram.  §  155,  p.  271.  — The  construction  of  tt^^n?  tO  is  unusual.   According  to  Keil  (and  Bertheaul 

ftS  V  is  to  be  taken  substantively,  as  in  Amos  vi.  10,  in  the  same  eense  in  which  the  later  Scriptures  use  ^NS  before 
the  infinitive,  2  Chron.  v.  11 ;  Esth.  iv.  2,  viii.  8 ;  Eccles  iii.  14.  Cf.  Ges.  Gram.  §  132,  3,  Bern.  1 ;  Ewald,  237  c."  Idea 
and  expression  might  then  be  represented  in  English  by  the  phrase  :  f<  there  was  no  driving  the  enemy  out."  On  pO^, 
6ee  foot-note  on  p.  39.  —  Te.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  17.  And  Judah  went  with  Simeon  his 
brother.  The  course  of  conquest  by  the  tribes 
is  regularly  followed,  but  the  narrative  delays 
only  at  such  points  as  are  connected  with  note- 
worthy facts.  When  Judah  had  reached  the  south, 
and  was  in  Arad,  the  statement  was  introduced 
that  the  Kenite  settled  there.  After  the  conquest 
of  the  south,  the  conquerors  turned  toward  the  low 
country  (ver.  9).  In  order  to  get  there,  they  must 
traverse  the  territory  of  Simeon.  Consequently, 
Judah  goes  with  Simeon  now,  to  assist  him  in  gain- 
ing possession  of  his  land.  This  expedition  also 
offered  an  event  which  it  was  important  to  chron- 
icle. 

They  smote  the  inhabitants  of  Zephath,  and 
called  the  city  Chormah.  In  itself  considered, 
the  mere  execution  of  the  ban  of  destruction  on 
a  city  otherwise  unknown,  cannot  be  of  such  im- 
portance as  would  properly  make  it  the  only  re- 
ported event  of  the  campaign  in  Simeon's  territory. 
The  record  must  have  been  made  with  reference  to 
some  event  in  the  earlier  history  of  Israel.1  The 
tribes  had  just  been  in  Arad,  where  the  Kenites 
settled.  Now,  according  to  the  narrative  in  Num. 
xxi.  1  ff.,  it  was  the  King  of  Arad  who  suddenly  fell 
upon  the  people  in  their  journey  through  the  desert. 
The  attack  was  made  when  the  Israelitish  host  was 
in  a  most  critical  situation,  which,  to  be  sure,  could 
not  be  said  to  be  improved  by  the  ban  executed  on 
the  cities  of  the  king  after  the  victory  was  won. 
Not  Arad,  —  for  this  retained  its  name,  —  but  one 

1  Compare  Rosenmuller,  p.  25,  and  Hengstenberg,  Pent. 
Ii.  p.  179,  etc. 

2  The  King  of  Arad  only  is  spoken  of,  Num.  xxi.  1,  and 
It  is  not  said  that  Arad  was  called  Hormah.  The  ((  name  of 
the  (one)  place,"  it  is  stated,  they  called  Hormah,  whereas 
they  ''  banned  their  cities."  Since,  therefore,  Arad  and  Hor- 
mah are  distinguished,  it  is  plain  that  this  one  place  of  the 
banned  cities,  which  was  called  Hormah,  was  Zephath.  — 
[Beethead  :  "  It  has  been  thought,  indeed,  that  the  word 

□  **rQ   in  Num.  xxi.  3,  in  the  connection  in  which  it  stands, 

'     T 
Indicates  that  in  the  time  of  Moses  the  whole  southern  dis- 
trict received  the  name  Hormah,  whereas,  according  to  our 
passage  [i.  e.  Judg-  i.  17]  it  was  given  only  to  the  city  of 

tophath  ;  but  E^pQ  never  signifies  "region,"  and  must 


of  the  places  put  under  the  ban,  we  are  told,  re- 
ceived the  name  Hormah.2  The  vow  in  pursuance 
of  which  this  ban  was  inflicted  required  its  subse- 
quent maintenance  as  much  as  its  original  execu- 
tion. Thus  much  we  learn  from  the  passage  in 
Numbers.  That  a  close  connection  existed  between 
Arad  and  Hormah  is  also  confirmed  by  Josh.  xii. 
14,  where  a  king  of  Arad  and  one  of  Hormah  are 
named  together.  In  the  same  way  are  the  inhab- 
itants of  Hormah  and  the  Kenites  in  Arad  men- 
tioned together,  upon  occasion  of  David's  division  oi 
booty  (1  Sam.  xxx.  29).  Since  Moses  was  not  able 
to  occupy  these  regions,  the  banned  city,  as  appears 
plainly  from  Josh.  xii.  14,  where  a  king  of  Hormah 
occurs,  had  been  peopled  and  occupied  anew. 
Hence  it  was  the  task  of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  with 
the  help  of  Judah,  to  restore  the  vow  of  Israel,  and 
to  change  the  Zephath  of  its  heathen  inhabitants 
once  more  into  Hormah.  That,  in  this  respect 
also,  the  tribes  observed  the  commands  of  Moses, 
and  fulfilled  what  was  formerly  promised,  —  adjudg- 
ing to  one,  reward,  as  to  the  Kenite ;  to  another,  the 
ban,  as  to  Zephath.  —  this  is  the  reason  why  this 
fact  is  here  recorded.  Robinson  thought  that 
there  was  every  reason  for  supposing  that  in  the 
position  of  the  pass  es-Sufah,  far  down  in  the  south, 
the  locality  of  Zephath  was  discovered  ( Bib.  Res 
ii.  181).  The  position,  as  laid  down  on  his  map. 
strikes  me  as  somewhat  remote  from  Tell  'Arad ; 
and  the  name  es-Sufah,  Arabic  for  "  rock,"  cannot, 
on  account  of  its  general  character,  be  considered 
altogether  decisive.3  Moreover,  another  Zephath 
actually  occurs,  nearMareshah  (2  Chron.  xiv.  10), 

be  understood  here,  as  in  Gen.  xxviii   19  and  elsewhere,  of 
one  place  or  one  city."  —  Ta.] 

8  Some  ruins,  named  Sepata  by  the  Arabs,  were  found  by 
Rowlands  (cf.  Ritter,  xiv.  1084-5;  Williams'  Holy  City 
i.  464).  two  and  a  half  hours  southwest  of  Khalasa  (Robin  ■ 
son's  Elusa),  and  have  also  been  identified  with  Zephath 
Their  position  is  very  different  from  that  of  Tell  es-Suffih. 
They  also  seem  to  me  to  lie  too  remote  from  Arad.  That 
the  Biblical  name  Zephath  has  been  preserved,  after  the  Jew- 
ish inhabitants  for  many  centuries  must  have  used,  not  that, 
but  Hormah,  does  not  appear  at  all  probable.  In  the  moun- 
tains of  Ephraim,  Eli  Smith  came  into  a  village  Um-Sufah. 
"  It  reminded  him  of  the  locality  of  Hormah  near  the 
southern  border  of  Palestine,  both  of  which  names  [Um- 
Sufah  and  Hormah)  iu  Arabic  designate  such  smooth  tract/ 
of  rock  '"  (Ritter,  xvi.  561). 


CHAPTER   I.    17-20. 


33 


not  far  from  Eleutheropolis,  and  Robinson  (ii.  31) 
makes  it  probable  that  by  the  valley  of  Zephath  in 
which  King  Asa  fought,  the  wady  is  meant  which 
"  comes  down  from  Beit  Jibrin  towards  Tell  es- 
Safieh."  In  the  Middle  Ages,  a  castle  existing 
there,  bore  the  name  Alba  Specula,  Fortress  of  Ob- 
servation, which  at  all  events  agrees  with  the  sig- 
nification of  Zephath. 

Ver.  18.  And  Judah  took  Gaza,  Askelon,  and 
Ekron.  The  territory  assigned  to  Judah  extended 
to  the  sea,  including  the  Philistine  coast-land,  with 
their  five  cities.  After  the  conquest  of  Simeon's 
lot  their  course  descended  from  the  hills  into  the 
lowlands  (Shephelah,  ver.  9),  most  probably  by  way 
of  Beer-sheba,  to  the  sea.  In  their  victorious  prog- 
ress, they  storm  and  seize  Gaza,  Askelon,  and 
Ekron,  pressing  on  from  south  to  north.  Although 
Ashdod  is  not  mentioned  here,  it  is  natural  to  sup- 
pose, since  it  was  included  in  the  borders  assigned 
to  Judah  (Josh,  xv.),  and  lay  on  the  road  from 
Askelon  to  Ekron,  that  it  was  also  taken,  previous 
to  the  conquest  of  Ekron.  Josephus,  drawing  the 
6ame  inference,  expressly  includes  it.     It  is  said 

"'S  7!1])  "  they  took  by  storm."  They  were  not 
able,  at  this  time,  so  to  take  and  hold  these  places 
as  to  expel  their  inhabitants.  The  tribe  of  Judah, 
which,  as  it  seems,  now  continued  the  war  alone, 
on  the  sea-coast  fell  in  with  cultivated  cities,  pro- 
vided with  all  the  arts  of  warfare.  Israel  at  that 
time  was  not  prepared  for  long  and  tedious  wars. 
In  swift  and  stormy  campaigns,  their  divinely- 
inspired  enthusiasm  enabled  them  to  conquer.  On 
the  mountains,  where  personal  courage  and  natural 
strength  alone  came  into  play,  they  were  entirely 
victorious,  and  held  whatever  they  gained.  It  was 
only  in  the  plains,  where  the  inhabitants  of  the 
coast  cities  met  them  with  the  murderous  opposi- 
tion of  iron  chariots,  that  they  gave  up  the  duty  of 
gaining  entire  mastery  over  the  land.1  2 

Ver.  19.  For  the  inhabitants  of  the  low 
country  were  not  to  be  driven  out,  because 
they  had  iron   chariots.3     The   noble  simplicity 

1  Thus  an  internal  contradiction  between  this  verse  and 
the  statement  of  the  next  that  Jndah  failed  to  drive  out  the 
inhabitants  of  the  low  country,  aa  asserted  by  Baihinger 
(Herz.  Real-Encykl.  xi.  564),  does  not  exist. 

2  [The  author  identifies  the  pttl?,   the    inhabitants   of 

which  Judah  failed  to  drive  out,  with  the  P  v£tE\  ver.  9, 

t  ••    : 
and  hence  renders  it  (see  ver.  19)  by  Niederung,  r  low  coun- 
try," prop,  depression.     Against  this  identification,  accepted 
by  Studer,   Bertheau,  Keil,   and   many   others,   Bachmann 
objects  that,  with  the  single  exception  of  Jer.  xlvii.  6,  a 

poetic  passage  in  a  late  prophet,  p^2V  is  never  applied  to 
,ne  Philistine  plain.  tf  In  accordance  with  its  derivation, 
[7Q3?  denotes  a  valley-basin  fcf.  Robinson,  Phys.  Geog. 
p.  70),  broadly  extended  it  may  be  (Gen.  xiv.  9,  10 ;  Josh. 
xvii.  16;  etc.),  adapted  for  battle  (Josh.  viii.  13),  susceptible 
of  cultivation  (Job  xxxix.  10  ;  Cant.  ii.  1 ;  Ps.  Ixv.  14  ;  etc.), 
but  stiil  always  depressed  between  mountains  and  bordered 
by  them.  It  never  means  a  level  plain  or  lowlands"  Cf. 
Stanley,  Sinai  and  Pal.,  p.  476,  Amer.  el.  Bachmann, 
therefore,  looks  for  the  Emek  —  which,  by  the  way,  with 
the  article,  is  not  necessarily  singular,  but  may  be  used 
collectively  —  within  or  at  least  very  near  the  Mountains  of 
ludah.  tf  Of  valleys  affording  room  for  the  action  of  char- 
tots,  the  mountains  of  Judah  have  several ;  e.  g".,  the  Einek 
-tephaim.  Josh.  xv.  8,  southwest  of  Jerusalem,  one  hour  long 
\nd  one  half  hour  broad,  known  as  a  battle-field  in  other 
Smes  also  (2  Sam.  v.  18,  22  ;  xxiii.  13) ;  the  Emek  ha-Elah, 
Sam.  xvii.  1,  2  ;  the  broad  basins  of  the  valleys  of  Jehosh- 
tphath  and  Ben  Hinnoiu  near  the  northern  boundary  (see 
Rob.      268,  273)  ;  the  great,  basin-like    plain  of  Beni  Nairn 


of  the  narrative  could  not  show  itself  more  plainly 
"  The  Lord  was  with  Judah,  and  he  gained  posses- 
sion of  the  mountain  district ;  but  £2?,"1"in  ■_  Sv, 
not  to  be  driven  out,"  etc.     The  expression  S  / 

^?t"  "  they  could  not,"  is  purposely  avoided. 
They  would  have  been  quite  able  when  God  was 
with  them;  but  when  it  came  to  a  contest  with  iron 
chariots  their  faith  failed  them.  The  tribes  of 
Joseph  were  likewise  kept  out  of  the  low  country 
because  the  inhabitants  had  chariots  of  iron  (Josh 
xvii.  16) ;  but  Joshua  said  (ver.  IS),  "  Thou  shall 
(or  canst)  drive  out  the  Canaanite,  though  he  be 
strong."  Iron  chariots  are  known  only  to  the 
Book  of  Judges,  excepting  the  notice  of  them  in 
the  passage  just  cited  from  Joshua.  The  victory 
of  Deborah  and  Barak  over  Jabin,  king  of  Canaan, 
owed  much  of  its  glory  to  the  fact  that  Sisera  com- 
manded Dine  hundred  iron  chariots.  Bertheau 
rejects  the  earlier  opinion  that  these  chariots  were 
currus  falcati,  scythe-chariots,  on  the  ground  that 
those  were  unknown  to  the  Egyptians.  He  thinks 
it  probable  that  the  chariots  of  the  Canaanites,  like 
those  of  the  Egyptians,  were  only  made  of  wood, 
but  with  iron-clad  corners,  etc.,  and  therefore  very 
strong.  But  such  chariots  would  never  be  called  iron 
chariots.  The  Egyptian  war-chariots  which  Pha- 
raoh leads  forth  against  Israel,  are  not  so  ealleu. 
To  speak  of  chariots  as  iron  chariots,  when  they 
were  in  the  main  constructed  of  a  different  material, 
would  be  manifestly  improper,  unless  what  of  iron 
there  was  about  them,  indicated  their  terrible  de- 
structive capacities.  It  has,  indeed,  been  inferred 
from  Xenophon's  Cyropaidia  (vi.  1, 27),  that  scythe- 
chariots  were  first  invented  by  Cyrus,  and  that 
they  were  previously  unknown  "  in  Media,  Syria 
Arabia,  and  the  whole  of  Asia."  But  even  if  this 
Cyrus  were  to  be  deemed  strictly  historical,  the 
whole  notice  indicates  no  more  than  the  improve- 
ment *  of  a  similar  kind  of  weapon.  It  does  not 
at  all  prove  that  scythe-chariots  did  not  previously 
exist.      The    principal    improvement  which    the 

in  the  east  (see  Rob.  i.  488  ff.) ;  and  others.  And  that,  in 
general,  chariots  in  considerable  numbers  might  be  used  in 
the  mountain  country,  appears,  with  reference  to  a  region  a 
little  further  north,  from  1  Sam.  xiii.  5."  Bachmann's 
view  of  the  connection  of  ver.  19  with  what  precedes  is  as 
follows  :  Ver.  9.  The  battle  of  Bezek,  etc.,  having  secured 
.1  udati  from  attacks  in  the  rear,  and  left  him  free  to  proceed 
in  his  undertakings,  the  theatre  of  these  undertakings  is 
divided  by  ver.  9  into  three  parts :  the  mountain  country, 
the  south  (negeb),  and  the  plain  (shephelah).  The  conquest 
of  the  mountain  country  is  illustrated  by  a  couple  of  in 
stances  in  vers.  10-15  ;  that  of  the  south  is  similarly  indi 
cated  in  vers.  16,  17 ;  and  that  of  the  plain  in  ver.  18 
Here,  too,  Judah  was  successful  in  his  undertakings.  As 
in  the  other  cases,  the  places  named  here,  Gaza,  Askelon, 
Ekron,  are  only  mentioned  as  examples  of  what  took  place 
in  the  Shephelah  generally.  The  conquest  of  the  western 
parts  of  the  Shephelah  being  related,  that  of  the  eastern 
districts,  nearer  the  mountains,  was  left  to  be  inferred  a.-  a 
matter  of  course.  Then,  in  ver.  19,  the  narrative  returns 
to  the  mountain  country,  in  order  to  supplement  vers.  10-15 
by  indicating,  what  those  verses  did  not  show,  that  the  con- 
quest of  this  division,  the  first  of  the  three  mentioned,  wafl 
not  complete.  —  Te.] 

3  How  properly  the  readings  of  the  Septuaginta  are  not 
considered  as  authorities  against  the  Hebrew  text,  is  suffi- 
ciently shown  by  the  single  fact  that  here  they  read,  "  ori 
•P»jxd0  SieoretAaTO  cuiTots,"  which  also  passed  over  into  the 
Syriac  version.  A  few  Codd.  add  K  «ai  ap/iara  triSTjpa  nv- 
to7«." 

4  Cf.  Joh.  flottl.  Schneider  in  his  edition  of  the  Cyrojug 
dm  (Lips.  1840),  p.  368. 


40 


THE  BOOK  UF  JUDGES. 


Cyrus  of  Xenophon  introduced,  was,  that  he 
changed  the  chariot-rampart,  formed  perhaps  after 
the  manner  of  the  Indian  battle-array  [a/cschau- 
him,1  the  idea  of  our  game  of  chess)  into  a  means 
of  aggressive  warfare.  For  this  purpose,  he  changed 
the  form  of  the  chariot,  and  added  the  scythe  to 
the  axle-tree.  But  the  chariots  of  our  passage 
must  already  have  been  intended  for  aggressive 
action,  since  otherwise  the  purpose  of  the  iron  is 
incomprehensible.  Nor  does  Xenophon  assert  that 
Cyrus  was  the  first  who  affixed  scythes  to  chariots, 
although  he  would  not  have  failed  to  do  so  if  that 
had  been  his  opinion.  It  is,  moreover,  in  itself  not 
probable.  Xenophon  mentions  that  the  (African) 
Cyrenians  "  still  '  had  that  kind  of  chariots  which 
Cyrus  invented.2  And  Strabo  informs  us  that  in 
his  time  the  Nigretes,  Pharusii,  and  Ethiopians, 
African  tribes,  made  use  of  the  scythe-chariot.3 
The  changes  introduced  in  the  chariot  by  Cyrus, 
were  made  in  view  of  a  war  against  the  Assyrians, 
whom  Xenophon  distinguishes  from  the  Syrians. 
But  from  a  statement  of  Ctesias  4  we  learn  that  the 
Assyrian  armies  already  had  scythe-chariots.  The 
same  occasion  induced  Cyrus  to  clothe  his  chariot- 
warriors  in  armor.  For  at  all  events,  Assyrian 
monuments  represent  the  charioteers  encased  in 
coats  of  mail.5  It  serves  to  explain  the  term  iron 
chariots,  that  Xenophon  also  speaks  of  iron  scythes 
(Sue'irwa  ffiSripu).  Curtius  (iv.  9,  4)  describes 
chariots  which  carried  iron  lances  on  their  poles 
(ex  summo  temone  hastce  prcejixce  Jerro  eminebant), 
for  which  the  form  of  Assyrian  chariots  seems  to 
be  very  well  adapted.  Representations  of  them 
sufficiently  indicate  the  horrors  of  these  instru- 
ments of  war,  by  the  bodies  of  the  slain  between 
their  wheels. 

Ver.  20.  And  they  gave  Hebron  unto  Caleb. 
This  statement,  even  after  that  of  ver.  10,  is  by  no 
means  superfluous.  Now,  and  not  before,  could 
Caleb  receive  Hebron  as  a  quiet  possession.  Judah 
must  first  enter  his  territory.  When  the  conquest 
was  completed,  —  and  it  was  completed  after  the 
western  parts  of  the  mountain  region  also  sub- 
mitted, —  the  tribe  of  Judah  entered  upon  its  pos- 
sessions ;  and  then  the  aged  hero  received  that 
which  had  been  promised  him.  Then  also,  most 
likely,  transpired  that  beautiful  episode  which  gave 
to  Othniel  his  wife  and  property. 


HOMILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

Vers.  4-20.  Obedient,  believing,  united  Israel 
is  attended  by  victory.     And  in  victory  it  knows 

1  Bohlen,  Attes  Indien,  ii.  66. 

2  [On  this  sentence  of  our  author,  Bachmann  remarks  : 
"  Cassel's  explanation  that  the  Cyrenians  had  r  still '  that 
kind  of  chariots  which  C.vrus  invented,  is  the  opposite  of 
what  Xenophon,  /.  c,  expressly  and  repeatedly  declares, 
namely,  that  Cyrus  abolished  (icaTeA.va'e }  both  the  earlier 
{■npoaQtv  ovtrav)  Trojan  method  of  chariot^warfare,  and  also 
that  still  in  use  (In  xai  vvv  ouaai/}  among  the4  Cyrenians, 
which  formerly  (rbv  irpoadev  xpovov)  was  also  practiced  by 
the  Medefl,  Syrians,  etc."  Bertheau  and  Bachmann  (Keil, 
too)  resist  the  conversion  of  K  iron  chariots  "  into  currus 
faicati  on  the  ground  that  these  were  unknown  before  Cy- 


how  to  punish  and  reward.  Adonibezek  terriblj 
experiences  what  he  had  inflicted  on  others,  hut 
the  sons  of  the  Kenite  dwell  like  brethren  in  the 
midst  of  Judah.  The  Canaanite  is  chastised ;  but 
the  Kenite  reaps  the  fruits  of  conquest.  The  un- 
believers among  the  spies  formerly  sent  by  Moses 
are  infamous,  but  Caleb  gains  an  inheritance  full 
of  honor.  Thus,  faith  makes  men  united  before 
action ;  after  it,  just.  Men  are  wise  enough  to 
give  every  one  his  own  {suum  cuique),  only  so  long 
as  they  continue  obedient  toward  God.     For  faith 

1 .  regards  that  which  is  God's  ;    and,  therefore, 

2.  awards  according  to  real  deserts.  Othniel  ob- 
tained Caleb's  daughter,  not  because  he  was  his 
nephew  (nepos),  but  because  he  took  Kirjath-sephtr. 
Before  God,  no  nepotism  holds  good,  for  it  is  a  sign 
of  moral  decay ;  on  the  contrary,  he  gives  the 
power  of  discerning  spirits.  He  only,  who  in  tht 
sanctuary  of  God  has  inquired  after  "Light  anc 
Righteousness  "  (Urim  and  Thummim),  can  prop 
erly  punish  and  reward. 

Starke  (ver.  16)  :  The  children  of  those  par- 
ents who  have  deserved  well  of  the  church  of  God, 
should  have  kindness  shown,  and  benefits  extended 
to  them  before  others.  For  ingratitude  is  a  shame- 
ful thing. 

The  same  (ver.  17):  Covenants,  even  when 
involving  dangers,  must  be  faithfully  kept  by  all, 
but  especially  by  brothers  and  sisters. 

[Scott  (ver.  19):  Great  things  might  be 
achieved  by  the  professors  of  the  gospel,  if  they 
unitedly  endeavored  to  promote  the  common  cause 
of  truth  and  righteousness;  for  then  "the  Lord 
would  be  with  them,"  and  every  mountain  would 
sink  into  a  plain.  But  when  outward  difficulties 
are  viewed  by  the  eye  of  sense,  and  the  almighty 
power  of  God  is  forgotten,  then  no  wonder  we  do 
not  prosper;  for  according  to  our  faith  will  be  our 
vigor,  zeal,  and  success.  Love  of  ease,  indulgence, 
and  worldly  advantages,  both  spring  from  and  fos- 
ter unbelief.  Thus  many  an  awakened  sinner, 
who  seemed  to  have  escaped  Satan's  bondage,  "  is 
entangled  again,  and  overcome,  and  his  last  state 
is  worse  than  the  first."  Thus  even  many  a  be- 
liever who  begins  well  is  hindered  :  he  grows  neg- 
ligent and  unwatchful  and  afraid  of  the  cross ;  his 
graces  languish,  his  evil  propensities  revive;  Satau 
perceives  his  advantage,  and  plies  him  with  suita- 
ble temptations ;  the  world  recovers  its  hold ;  he 
loses  his  peace,  brings  guilt  into  his  conscience, 
anguish  into  his  heart,  discredit  on  his  character, 
and  reproach  on  the  gospel ;  his  hands  are  tied, 
his  mouth  is  closed,  and  his  usefulness  ruined.  — 
Tr.] 

rus,  who  inyented  them,  CyropeBdia,  vi.  1,  27,  30.  On  the 
Egyptian  war-chariot,  see  Wilkinson,  Manners  and  Customs, 
i.  350.  — Tr.] 

3  Lib.  xvii.  3,  7,  ed.  Paris,  p.  ',03:  tr\pun-Tai  Se  icai  8pe- 

Tran7^>opot5  apfxao't-'1 

4  In  the  Bibt.  Hist,  of  Diodor  is,  ii.  5. 

5  Cf.  Layard,  Nineveh  and  its  Remains,  ii.  335.  [For  an 
account  of  the  Assyrian  war-ctu.riot,  p.  349.  Oo  p.  353, 
Layard  remarks:  r:  Chariots  ana'.d  with  scythes  are  not 
seen  in  the  Assyrian  sculpture,  although  mentioned  by 
Ctesias  as  being  in  the  army  of  Ninus."  —  Tr.] 


CHAPTER   I.    21-26. 


4) 


Benjamin  is  inactive,  and  allows   the  Jebusite  to  remain  in  Jerusalem. 
Joseph  emulates  Judah,  and  takes  Bethel. 

Chapter  I.     21-26. 


The  House  oi 


21  And 1  the  children  [sons]  of  Benjamin  did  not  drive  out  the  Jebusites  that  inhab- 
ited Jerusalem :  but  the  Jebusites  dwell  [dwelt]  with  [among]  -  the  children  [sons] 

22  of  Benjamin  in  Jerusalem  unto  this  day.     And  the  house  of  Joseph,  they  also  s  went 

23  up  against  Beth-el :  and  the  Lord   [Jehovah]  was  with   them.     And  the   house  of 
Joseph  sent  to  descry  [spy  out  the  entrance  to]  4  Beth-el.     Now  the  name  of  the  city 

24  before  was,  Luz.     And  the  spies  saw  a  man  come  forth  out  of  the  city,  and  thny 
said  unto  him,  Shew  us,  we  pray   thee,  the  entrance  into  the  city,  and  we  will  shew 

25  thee  mercy  [favor].     And  when  [omit :  when]  he  shewed  them  the  entrance  into  the 
city,  [and]  they  smote  the  city  with  the  edge  of  the  sword  :  but  they  let  go  the  man 

26  and  all  his  family.     And  the  man  went  into  the  land  of  the  Hittites,  and  built  [there] 
a  city,  and  called  the  name  thereof  Luz  :  which  is  the  name  thereof  unto  this  day. 

TEXTUAL    AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[i  Ver.  21.  —  The  1  would  be  better  taken  adversitively  :  But.  It  contrasts  the  conduct  of  Benjamin  with  that  of 
Caleb,  ver.  20.  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  21.  —  Cf.  note  2,  on  ver.  16,  and  3  on  ver.  29.  —  Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  22.  —  Dn~C2  look9  back  to  ver.  3  ff  and  intimates  a  parallelism  between  the  conduct  of  the  House  of 
Joseph  and  that  of  Judah  and  his  brother  Simeon.  —  Tr.] 

[4  Ver.  23.  — Dr.  Cassel  apparently  supplies  N"QT3  from  the  next  verse.  ~^i^,  it  is  true,  is  usually  followed  by  the 
accusative,  not  by  3.  But  on  the  other  hand,  S12^3  is  put  in  the  const,  state  before  "V37  (cf-  vers.  24,  25) ;  whereas, 
if  we  supply  it  here,  we  must  suppose  it  joined  to  T*3?  by  means  of  a  preposition.  It  is  as  well,  therefore,  to  say,  with 
Bertheau,  that  "  the  verb  is  connected  with  2  because  the  spying  is  to  fasten  itself,  and  that  continuously,  upon  Bethel, 
cf.  2  with  nS™1  and  nW^H  ',      or  with  Bachmann,   that       2  indicates  the  hostile  character  of  the  spving.7'    S^— *2 

T  T  T     :    •  .      :  T 

Is  used  as  a  general  expression  for  any  way  or  mode  of  access  into  the  city  :    rt  Show  us  how  to  get  in,    is  the  demand  ot 
the  spies.  —  Tr.) 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRLNAL. 

Ver.  2 1 .     And  the  sons  of  Benjamin  did  not 
drive  out  the  Jebusite.     At  Josh.  xv.  63,  at  the 
close  of  a  detailed  description  of  the  territory  of 
Judah,  it  is  said,  "  As  for  the  Jebusites,  the  inhabi- 
tants of  Jerusalem,  the  sons  of  Judah  could  not 
drive  them  out ;  and  the  Jebusites  dwelt  with  the 
sons  of  Judah  in  Jerusalem  unto  this  day."     This 
verse  has  been  thought  to  contradict  the  one  above. 
In  reality,  however,  it  only  proves  the  exactness 
of  the  statements.    The  boundary  line  of  the  tribes 
of  Benjamin  and  Judah  ran  through  the  district  of 
Jerusalem,   through   the  valley  of  Ben   Hinnom, 
south  of  the  city  (Josh.  xv.  8).     The  city  already 
extended  outward  from  the  foot  of  the  citadel.  The 
remark  of  Josephus,1  that,  in  the   passage  above 
discussed,  Judg.  i.  8,  the  tribe  of  Judah  took  only 
the  lower  city,  not  the  citadel,  has  great  probability 
on  its  side.     The  conquest  of  the  citadel  was  not 
their  business  at  the  time.     It  was   sufficient  for 
them  to  pursue  the  hostile  king  into  his  city,  and 
then  lay  that  in  ashes.     The  citadel  lay  within  the 
tribe  of  Benjamin.     Nevertheless,  on  account  of 
this  fortress,  Judah,  also,  was  not  able  to  expel  the 
Jebusites,  who  continued  to  live  side  by  side  with 
them  in  the  district  of  Jerusalem.     At  all  events, 
the  Jebusites  in  Jerusalem  belonged  to  the  territory 
of  Judah  so  far  at   least,  that  the  failure  to  expel 

1   Ant.    T.   2,  3 :     XaAejnj  6"  ^v  y}  KaOvncpBcv  avToic  aipc- 
ij„a„   etc. 


them  must  be  mentioned  in  connection  with  the 
boundaries  of  Judah.  Still  more  necessary  was  it 
to  repeat  this  statement  in  connection  with  Benja- 
min, within  whose  limits  the  city  and  fortress  of  the 
Jebusites  were  situated.  Their  expulsion  properly 
devolved  on  this  tribe.  Successful  occupation  of 
the  stronghold  would  have  greatly  increased  the 
honor  and  consideration  of  Benjamin.  The 
importance  of  the  place,  David  recognized  as  soon 
as  he  became  king.  But  Benjamin  was  content 
when  the  Jebusites,  humbled  by  Judah,  offered  no 
resistance,  left  them  in  possession  of  the  fortress, 
and  lived  peaceably  together  with  them.  It  has 
been  justly  observed,  that  different  terms  are  em- 
ployed in  speaking  of  the  failure  of  Judah  and 
Benjamin  respectively  to  drive  out  the  Jebusites. 
Of  Judah  it  is  said  (Josh.  xv.  63),  "they  could 
not,"  because  the  Jebusites  had  their  stronghold 
in  another  tribe.  But  of  Benjamin  this  expression 
is  not  used,  because  they  were  wanting  in  disposi- 
tion and  energy  for  the  struggle  that  devolved 
upon  them.     Cf.  on  eh.  xix.  12. 

Ver.  22.  And  the  house  of  Joseph,  they  also 
went  up  toward  Bethel.  This  action  of  the  house 
of  Joseph  is  told  byway  of  contrast  with  the  house 
of  Benjamin.  The  tribe  of  Benjamin  lay  between 
Judah  "and  Ephraim  (Josh,  xviii.  11);  and  Bethel, 
within  its  limits,  formed  a  counterpart  to  Jerusa- 
lem. Historically,  Bethel  is  celebrated  for  the 
blessing  there  promised  to  Jacob,  and  afterward! 
less  favorably  for  the  idolatrous  worship  of  Jero 


42 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


boam  Geographically,  it  was  important  on  ac- 
count of  its  position  and  strength.  As  Jebus  and 
Jerusalem  are  always  identified,  so  it  is  everywhere 
remarked  of  Bethel,  that  it  was  formerly  Luz  ;  and 
as  Jebus  indicated  particularly  the  fortress,  Jerusa- 
lem the  city,  —  although  the  "latter  name  also  em- 
braced both,  —  so  a  similar  relation  must  be 
assumed  to  have  existed  between  Bethel  and  Luz. 
Otherwise  the  border  of  Benjamin  could  not  have 
run  south  of  Luz  (Josh,  xviii.  13),  while  neverthe- 
less Bethel  was  reckoned  among  the  cities  of  Ben- 
jamin (Josh,  xviii.  22).  This  assumption,  more- 
over, explains  the  peculiar  phraseology  of  Josh, 
xviii.  13 :  "  And  the  border  went  over  from  thence  to- 
ward Luz  ( after  which  we  expect  the  usual  addition 
"  which  is  Bethel ;  "  but  that  which  does  follow  is  :) 
on  the  south  side  of  Luz,  which  is  Bethel.  It  ex- 
plains likewise  the  mention,  Josh.  xvi.  2,  of  the 
border  "  from  Bethel  to  Luz,"  i.  e.  between  Bethel 
and  Luz.  The  latter  was  evidently  a  fortress, 
high  and  strong,  whose  city  descended  along  the 
mountain-slope.  When  Jacob  erected  his  altar,  it 
must  have  been  on  this  slope  or  in  the  valley.  One 
name  designated  both  fortress  and  city,  but  this 
does  not  militate  against  their  being  distinguished 
from  each  other.  Bethel  belonged  to  two  tribes  in 
a  similar  manner  as  Jerusalem.  The  capture  of 
Luz  by  Joseph  would  not  have  been  told  in  a  pas- 
sage which  treats  of  the  conflicts  of  the  individual 
tribes  in  their  own  territories,  if  that  fortress  had 
not  belonged  to  the  tribes  of  Joseph.  By  the  con- 
quest of  Luz,  Joseph  secured  the  possession  of 
Bethel,  since  both  went  by  that  name,  just  as 
David,  when  he  had  taken  the  fortress  of  the  Jebu- 
site,  was  for  the  first  time  master  of  Jerusalem. 
This  deed  is  related  as  contrasting  with  the  con- 
duct of  Benjamin.  Benjamin  did  nothing  to  take 
the  fortress  of  Zion  :  Joseph  went  up  to  Luz,  and 
God  was  with  him.  This  remark  had  been  impos- 
sible, if,  as  has  been  frequently  assumed,1  the  tribe 
of  Joseph  had  arbitrarily  appropriated  to  itself  the 
city  which  had  been  promised  to  Benjamin.  The 
riew  of  ancient  Jewish  expositors,  who  assume  a 
Bethel  in  the  valley  and  one  on  the  mountain,  does 
not  differ  from  that  here  suggested. — Robinson 
seems  to  have  established  the  position  of  the  an- 
cient Bethel  near  the  present  Beitin,  where  scat- 
tered ruins  occupy  the  surface  of  a  hill-point.  A 
few  minutes  to  the  N.  E.,  on  the  highest  spot  of 
ground  in  the  vicinity,  are  other  ruins,  erroneously 
supposed  to  be  Ai  by  the  natives :  these  also  per- 
haps belonged  to  Bethel.2  It  cannot,  however,  be 
said,  that  until  Robinson  this  position  was  entirely 
unknown.  Esthori  ha-Parchi,  who  in  his  time 
found  it  called  Bethai,  the  I  having  fallen  away, 
was  evidently  acquainted  with  it.:i  In  another 
work  of  the  fourteenth  century  the  then  current 
name  of  Bethel  is  said  to  be  Bethin.* 

Vers.  23-25.    And  the  house  of  Joseph  sent  to 

spy  out.  ^""Tl  from  "Wl,  to  travel  around, 
in  order  to  find  an  entrance  less  guarded  and  inac- 
cessible. Luz  appeared  to  be  very  strong  and  well 
guarded,  and  for  a  long  time  the  assailants  vainly 

1  Already  by  Reland,  Palrrstina,  p.  841. 

2  Robioson,  BM.  R>s.  i.  448. 

8  Kaflor  ve  Plurach  (Berlin  edition),  ch.  xi.  pp.  47,  48. 
Zf.  Zuuz,  in  Asher's  Benj.  of  Tii'lda,  ii.  436. 

*  Ishak  Chelo  in  Carinoly,  pp.  249.  250. 

6  The  Qennan  traitor  Segestes  merely  alleges  that  he  fol- 
lows higher  reasons,  although  he  knows  that  "jyrorlilores 
etiam  Ht  f/uos  anteponitnl  mvisi  sunt."  Tacit.,  Annal.  i.  58, 
2.  Israel  saw  the  hand  of  a  higher  Helper  in  such  assist- 
ance ;  and  hence  it  had  no  hatre  toward  the  rstru- 
uent* 


sought  a  suitable  opportunity  for  a  successful  as- 
sault. When  the  Persians  besieged  Sardis,  their 
efforts  were  long  in  vain.  One  day  a  Persian  saw 
a  Lydian,  whose  helmet  had  fallen  over  the  ram 
part,  fetch  it  back  by  a  hitherto  unnoticed  way 
The  man  was  followed,  and  the  city  was  taken 
(Herod,  i.  84).  A  similar  accident  favored  the 
conquest  of  the  fortress.  The  spies  saw  a  man 
who  had  come  out  of  the  city.  He  failed  to  escape 
them.  They  compelled  him  to  disclose  the  en- 
trance. They  promised  him  peace  and  mercy  on 
condition  of  snowing  them  the  right  way.  He 
did  it.  It  seems  not  even  to  have  been  necessary 
to  storm  the  city ;  they  fell  upon  the  inhabitants 
unawares.  Only  the  man  who  had  assisted  them, 
and  his  family,  were  spared.  They  let  him  go  in 
peace.  He  was  evidently  no  Ephialtes,  who  had 
betrayed  the  city  for  money.  Doing  it  under  com- 
pulsion, and  unconsciously  serving  a  great  cause,5 
no  calamity  betell  him,  and  he  found  a  new  country. 
It  not  only  behooves  the  people  of  God  to  perform 
what  they  have  promised,  but  Jewish  tradition  fol- 
lowed persons  like  Rahab  and  this  man,  as  those 
who  had  furthered  the  course  of  sacred  history 
against  their  own  people,  with  peculiar  kindness. 
This  man.  like  Rahab,  is  blessed  for  all  time  (cf. 
Jalkut  on  the  passage,  p.  8,  d) . 

Ver.  26.  And  the  man  went  into  the  land  of 
the  Hittites.  It  evinces  a  special  interest  in  the 
man  that  his  fortunes  are  traced  even  into  a  strange 
laud.  Greek  patriotism  relates  that  Ephialtes 
fared  as  he  deserved  ; 6  our  history  employs  the 
favorable  destiny  which  befell  this  man,  to  show 
that  as  he  did  not  designedly  for  the  sake  of  money 
practice  treason,  so  he  was  also  the  instrument 
of  setting  a  prosperous  enterprise  on  foot.  But 
where  is  the  land  of  the  Chiltim  (Hittites)  to  which 
he  went  ?  In  nearly  all  passages  in  which  Scrip- 
ture makes  mention  of  the  Sons  of  Cheth  (j~in, 
E.  V.  Heth),  the  Chitti  (Vin,  E.  V.  Hittite),  and 
the  Chittim    (~*.nn,  E.  V.  Hittites),  the  name 

appears  to  be  a  general  term,  like  the  word  Canaan- 
ite.  Especially  in  the  three  passages  where  the 
Chittim  are  mentioned 7  (Josh.  i.  4  ;  1  Kgs.  x.  29  j  2 
Kgs.  vii.  6),  their  land  and  kings  are  placed  between 
Egypt  and  Aram  in  such  a  way  as  seems  to  be  ap- 
plicable only  to  the  populations  of  Canaan.  Mov- 
ers8 has  successfully  maintained  that  E\Fin    and 

3^713  refer  to  the  same  race  of  people  ;  but  it  can- 
not be  accepted  that  this  race  consisted  only  of  the 
Kittim  of  Cyprus.  It  must  rather  be  assumed 
that  the  Chittim  answer  to  a  more  general  concep- 
tion, which  also  gave  to  the  Kittim,  their  colonists, 
the  name  they  bore.  The  historical  interpreta- 
tion of  Kittim,  which  applied  it  to  Ionians,  Mace- 
donians, and  Romans,  would  not  have  been  possi- 
ble, if  the  name  had  not  carried  with  it  the  notion 
of  coast-dwellers,9  an  idea  which  comparative  phi- 
lology may  find  indicated.  Now,  it  is  unques- 
tionable that  the  Phoenician  cities,  with  Tyre  at 

6  Ephialtes  was  the  traitor  of  Thermopylae,  cf.  Herod. 
vii.  213.  Traditions  are  still  curreut  of  a  traitor  at  Jena 
(1806),  who  was  obliged  to  flee  into  exile. 

7  [That  ft,  where  this  people  is  spoken  of  under  the  plural 
form  of  its  patronymic,  which  happens  only  five  times  — 
at  Judg.  i.  26,  2  Chron.  i.  17,  and  the  places  named  in  th« 
text.  —  Ta.] 

8  Pksnizier,  u.  2,  213,  etc. 

9  I  have   already  directed  attention  to  this   in  the  Mag 
AUert/iumtr  (Berlin,  1848),  p.  281. 


CHAPTER   I.   21-26. 


43 


their  head,  are  even  on  their  own  coins  designated 
by  the  terms  HH  and  H2.  As  from  its  lowlands, 
"  Canaan  "  became  the  general  popular  name  of 
Palestine,  so  likewise  to  a  certain  extent  the  name 
Chittim  became  a  general  term  applied  to  all 
Canaanites.  When  the  panic-struck  king  of  Aram 
thinks  that  Israel  has  received  support  from  the 
kings  of  Egypt  and  the  Chittim  (2  Kgs.  vii.  6),  this 
latter  name  can  only  signify  the  coast-cities,  whose 
power,  from  Tyre  upwards,  was  felt  throughout 
the  world.  From  the  fact  that  our  passage  merely 
says  that  the  man  went  into  the  land  of  Chittim,1 
and  presupposes  the  city  built  by  him  as  still 
known,  it  may  reasonably  be  inferred  that  he  went 
to  the  familiarly  known  Chittim  north  of  Israel 
The  probability  is  great  enough  to  justify  our  seek- 
ing this  Luz  upon  the  Phoenician  coast  or  islands. 
A  remarkable  notice  in  the  Talmud  {Sola,  46  b), 
derived  from  ancient  tradition,  may  lead  to  the 
same  conclusion  :  Luz  is  the  place  where  the  dyein; 

of  i"w3£l  is  carried  on,  where  there  are  hyacinth- 
ian  -  purple  dyeing-establishments.  Down  to  the 
most  recent  times,  the  coast  from  Tyre  upwards 
as  far  as  the  Syrian  Alexandria,  was  very  rich  in 
purple  (Ritter,  xvi.  611  [Gage's  Transl.  iv.  280]). 
Now,  pretty  far  away  to  the  north,  it  is  true,  in  the 
present  Jebel  el-Aala,  at  a  point  where  a  splendid 
northwest  prospect  over  the  plain  to  the  lake  of 
Antioch  offers  itself,  Thomson 3  found  hitherto 
wholly  unknown  ruins  bearing  the  name  of  Kulb 
Lousy,  with  remnants  of  old  and  splendid  temples 
The  surname  Kulb l  might  authorize  the  inference 
that  the  dyeing-business  was  formerly  exercised 
there.  The  existence  of  temple-ruins,  concernin 
which  the  Druses  said  that  they  had  been  with- 
out worshippers  from  time  immemorial,  explains 
also  another  remarkable  tradition  of  the  Tal- 
mud :  that  Luz  is  a  city  which  the  conquerors  of 
the  land  did  not  destroy,  and  to  which  the  angel  of 
death  never  comes,  but  that  they  who  feel  the  ap- 
proach of  death,  leave  the  city  of  their  own  accord. 
Traditions  like  this  are  characteristic  of  Sun- 
worship.  In  Delos  no  one  was  allowed  to  die  or 
to  be  buried.5  To  Claros  no  serpents  came. 
Neither  could  they  penetrate  to  the  land  of  the 
Astypalamns,  on  the  island  Cos.  The  island  Cos 
is  at  the  same  time  one  of  the  seats  of  the  ancient 
purple-trade.  In  the  Syrian  city  Emesa  there  was 
a  temple  of  the  Sun,  on  account  of  which  —  as  the 
story  still  went  in  Mohammedan  times —  scorpions 
and  venomous  animals  cannot  live  there.1'  Name, 
ruins,  and  tradition  would  therefore  tend  to  iden- 
tify Kulb  Lousy  as  the  remnant  of  an  ancient  city, 
distinguished  like  Cos  for  a  specific  form  of  indus- 
try and  for  its  sun-worship,  if  indeed  Cos  itself 

(i~Q)  be  not  understood  by  it. 

Luz  is  described  by  its  name  as  a  place  of  almond- 
trees  (Gen.  xxx.  37).  And  indeed,  philologically 
Luz  is  akin  to  mux,  nut.  The  Greek  xapvov  signi- 
fies almond  (on  account  of  its  shape)  as  well  as 
nut  and  egg.'1  Eusebius  was  induced  to  identify 
the  land  of  the  Chittim  with   Cyprus,  the  rather 

Cf.   oKTrj,    Cos   (the   island   Cos),   cautes,   costa,  cfte, 
Kiiste. 
2  The    Sept.   constantly   (with    barely    two   exceptions) 

translate  H  .  wi7!  by  veueivfliyos.  Cf.  Ad.  Schmidt,  Die 
frtechisehen  Papyrusinkunden  (Berlin.  1842),  p.  134. 

8  Cf.  Ritter,  xvii.  1577.  [Thomson,  Journey  from  Aleppo 
U>    Mt.    Lebanon,   in    Bibliotheea    Sacra,  vol.  v.   p.   667. — 


because  the  Cyprian  almonds  were  celebrated  in 
antiquity.5  The  almond-tree  has  always  abounded 
in  the  holy  land.  The  cities  are  in  ruins,  but  the 
tree  still  flourishes. 

HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

The  cessation  of  perfect  obedience  is  attended  by 
the  cessation  of  perfect  victory.  Benjamin  does 
not  expel  the  hostile  Jebusite  from  Jerusalem  be 
cause  he  has  lost  his  first  love.  The  tribes  of 
Joseph,  on  the  other  hand,  are  able  to  conquei 
Bethel,  because  God  is  with  them.  Benjamin,  the 
valiant  tribe,  is  alone  to  blame,  if  it  failed  to  tri 
umph  ;  for  when  Bethel  resisted  the  sons  of  Joseph 
the  latter  were  aided  by  a  fortunate  incident 
Benjamin  did  not  conquer  Jerusalem  ;  therefore, 
not  the  king  out  of  Benjamin  (Saul),  but  the  rulei 
out  of  Judah  (David),  dwelt  therein.  However, 
it  is  of  no  avail  to  conquer  by  faith,  unless  it  be 
also  maintained  in  faith ;  tor  Bethel  became  after 
wards  a  Beth-aven,  a  House  of  Sin. 

Starke  :  111  got,  ill  spent ;  but  that  also  which 
has  been  rightly  got,  is  apt  to  be  lost,  if  we  make 
ourselves  unworthy  of  the  divine  blessing,  just  as 
these  places  were  again  taken  from  the  Israelites. 

[Wordsworth  :  Here  then  was  a  happy  op- 
portunity for  the  man  of  Bethel ;  he  might  have 
dwelt  with  the  men  of  Joseph  at  Bethef  and  have 
become  a  worshipper  of  the  true  God,  ard  have 
thus  become  a  citizen  forever  of  the  heavenly  Bethel, 
the  house  of  God,  which  will  stand  forever.  Bui 
.  .  .  .  he  quits  the  house  of  God  to  propagate 
heathenism  and  idolatry.  The  man  of  Bethel, 
therefore,  is  presented  to  us  in  this  Scripture  as  a 
specimen  of  that  class  of  persons,  who  help  the 
Church  of  God  in  her  work  from  motives  of  fear, 
or  of  worldly  benefit,  and  not  from  love  of  God , 
and  who,  when  they  have  opportunities  of  spiritual 
benefit,  slight  those  opportunities,  and  even  shun 
the  light,  and  go  away  from  Bethel,  the  house  of 
God,  as  it  were,  unto  some  far-off  land  of  the 
Hittites,  and  build  there  a  heathen  Luz  of  their 
own.  —  The  same  :  There  are  four  classes  of  per- 
sons, whose  various  conduct  toward  the  Church 
of  God,  and  to  the  gospel  preached  by  her,  is  repre- 
sented by  four  cases  in  the  Books  of  Joshua  and 
Judges;  namely,  —  1.  There  is  this  case  of  the 
man  of  Bethel.  2.  There  is  the  case  of  the  Ke- 
nites,  in  ver.  16,  who  helped  Judah  after  their  vic- 
tories in  Canaan,  and  are  received  into  fellowship 
with  them.  3.  There  is  the  case  of  the  Gibeonites, 
who  came  to  Joshua  from  motives  of  fear,  and 
were  admitted  to  dwell  with  Israel,  as  hewers  of 
wood  and  drawers  of  water.  4.  There  is  the  case 
of  Rahab.  She  stands  out  in  beautiful  contrast 
to  the  man  of  Bethel.  He  helped  the  spies  of 
Joseph,  and  was  spared,  with  his  household,  but 
did  not  choose  to  live  in  their  Bethel.  But  Rahab 
received  the  spies  of  Joshua,  even  before  he  had 
gained  a  single  victory,  and  she  professed  her  faith 
in  their  God ;  and  she  was  spared,  she  and  her 
household,  and  became  a  mother  in  Israel,  an  an- 
cestress of  Christ  (see  Josh.  vi.  25). —  Tr.] 

4  Cf.  Bochart,  Hierozoicon,  ii.  740.     Aruck  (ed.  Amsteld.) 

p.  89,  s.  v.  D"Ob3. 

5  On  this  and  the  following  notices,  which  will  be  mow 
thoroughly  treated  in   the  second  part  of  my  Hierozoicon 
compare     meanwhile,  ^lian,  Hist.    Anim.    V.    cap.  vili. 
cap.  s.  49 

6  Cf.  Ritter,  xvii.  1010. 

7  Casaubon,  on  Atfienteus,  p.  65- 

8  Athenaeus,  p.  52  ;  ct.  Meureius,  Cyprus,  p.  80. 


44 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


A  list  of  places  in  the  central  and  northern  tribes  from  which  the  Canaaniles  were   not 

driven  out.      The  tribes  when  strong,  make  the  Canaanites  tributary ;  when  weak, 

are  content  to  dwell  in  the  midst  of  them. 

Chapter  I.  27-36. 


27  Neither  did  [And] 1  Manasseh  [did  not]  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  Beth-sheau  and 
her  towns  [daughter-cities],  nor  Taanach  and  her  towns  [daughter-cities],  nor  the 
inhabitants  of  Dor  and  her  towns  [daughter-cities],  nor  the  inhabitants  of  Ibleara 
and  her  towns  [daughter-cities],  nor  the  inhabitants  of  Megiddo  and  her  towns 
[daughter-cities]  ;  but  the  Canaanites  would  dwell  [consented  to  dwell]  in  that  land. 

28  And  it  came  to  pass  when  Israel  was  strong,  that  they  put  the  Canaanites  to  tribute 
[made    the    Canaanites    tributary],   and    [but]    did    uot    utterly    drive    them  out. 

29  Neither2  did  Ephraim   drive  out  the  Canaanites  that  dwelt  in  Gezer  ;  but   the  Ca- 

30  naanites  dwelt  in  Gezer  among3  them.  Neither4  did  Zebulun  drive  out  the  inhab- 
itants of  Kitron,  nor  the  inhabitants  of  Nahalol ;  but  the  Canaanites  dwelt  among 

31  them,  and  became  tributaries.  Neither  did  Asher  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  Accho, 
nor  the   inhabitants  of  Zidon.  nor  of  Ahlab,  nor  of  Achzib,  nor  of  Helbah,  nor  of 

32  Aphik,  nor  of  Rehob :    But  the  Asherites  dwelt  among  the  Canaanites,  the  inhab- 

33  itants  of  the  land  :  for  they  did  not  drive  them  out.  Neither  did  Naphtali  drive  out 
the  inhabitants  of  Beth-shemesh,  nor  the  inhabitants  of  Beth-anath  ;  but  he  dwelt 
among  the  Canaanites,  the  inhabitants  of  the  land  :  nevertheless,  [and]  the  inhabitants 
of  Beth-shemesh  and  of  Beth-anath  became  tributaries  [were  tributary]   unto  them. 

34  And  the  Amorites  forced  [crowded]5  the  children  [sons]  of  Dan  into  the  mountain 

mountains]  :    for  they  would  not  suffer  them  to  come  down  to  the  valley  :   But 
And]  the  Amorite  would  dwell  [consented  to  dwell]  in  mount  Heres  [,]  in  Aijalon, 
and  in   Shaalbim  :  yet  [and]  the  hand  of  the  house  of  Joseph   prevailed  [became 
36  powerful],  so  that  [and]  they  became  tributaries  [tributary].    And  the  coast  [border] 
of  the  Amorites  was  [went]  from  the  going  up  to  Akrabbim,  from  the   rock,  and  up- 
wards [from  Maahleh  Akrabbim,  and  from  Sela  and  onward]. 


TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

rl  Ver.  27.  — So  Dr.  Cassel.  But  the  position  of  the  verb  at  the  beginning  of  the  sentence  suggests  a  contrast  with 
what  precedes :  the  House  of  Joseph  took  Luz  ;  but  drive  out  the  inhabitants  of  Beth-shean  Manasseh  (a  member  of  th» 
House  of  Joseph)  did  not  do.     Cf.  next  note. — Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  29. — The   1  here  connects  Ephraim  with  Manasseh,  ver.  27  :  Ephraim  also  was  guilty  of  not  driving  out. 

-Tr.] 
[3  Ver.  29.—  12"ipa  :  lit.  "in  the  midst  of  them."     Cf.  vera.  16,  21,  30,  32,  33.— Tr.) 
[4  Ver.  30.  —  The  "  ne'ither  "  ought  to  be  omitted  here  acd  also  in  vera.  31  and  33.     Manasseh  and   Ephraim   are 

toupled  together,  cf.  notes  1  and  2  ;  but  from  this  point  each  tribe  is  treated  separately  :    "Zebulun  did  not  drive  out," 

etc.  —  Tr.] 

[5  Ver.  34.  —  ^H  Vs1 :  to  press,  to  push.  From  this  word  Bachm.  infers  that  Dan  had  originally  taken  more  of 
bH  territory  than  he  now  held.  —  Tr.] 


kxeqetical  and  doctrinal. 

Ver.  27.  And  Manasseh  did  not  drive  out. 
The  conquest  of  Luz  was  achieved  by  the  two 
brother  tribes  conjointly.  With  the  exception  of 
this  place,  the  lands  allotted  to  them  had  for  the 
most  part  been  already  conquered  by  Joshua.  The 
portion  of  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh  lay  about  the 
brook  Kanah  (Nahr  el-Akhdar).1  A  few  cities, 
however,  south  of  this  brook,  which  fell  to  Ephraim, 
were  made  good  to  Manasseh  by  certain  districts 
included  within  the  borders  of  Asher  and  Issachar. 
This  explains  why  Manasseh  did  not  drive  out  the 

1  [On  this  identification  of  the  brook  Kanah,  cf.  fliove  in 
tmith's  Bib.  Diet.,  8.  v.  "  Kanah,  the  River."  ■•-  Tr.1 


inhabitants  of  these  districts.  There  were  sLx  town- 
ships of  them,  constituting  three  several  domains, 
each  of  them  inclosed  in  the  lands  of  another  tribe 

(n53n  nt»btt7,  Josh.  xvii.  1 1 ).  The  first  of  these 
was  Beth-shean  to  the  east ;  the  second,  the  three 
cities  Megiddo,  Taanach,  and  Ibleam  ;  the  third, 
Dor  on  the  sea-coast.  The  two  former  were  in- 
closed within  the  tribe  of  Issachar ;  the  latter  should 
have  belonged  to  the  tribe  of  Asher.  The  districts 
thus  given  to  Manasseh  were  valuable.  Beth- 
shean  (Greek,  Scythopolis,  at  present  Beisftn)  oc- 
cupies an  important  position,  and  has  a  fertile  soil 
It  formed  a  connecting  link  between  the  two  seas, 
as  also  between  the  territories  east  and  west  »f  the 


CHAP1ER   I.   27-36. 


45 


/ordan ,  and  was  a  precious  oasis 1  in  the  Ghor,  the 
desert-like  valley  of  this  stream.  It  was  an  impor- 
tant place  in  both  ancient  and  later  times.  Esthor 
ha  Parchi,  the  highly  intelligent  Jewish  traveller 
of  the  14th  century,  who  made  this  place  the  cen- 
tral point  of  his  researches,  says  of  it :  "  It  is  situ- 
ated near  rich  waters,  a  blessed,  glorious  land,  fer- 
tile as  a  garden  of  God,  as  a  gate  of  Paradise  " 
(Berlin  ed.,  pp.  1,  6;  cf.  Zunz  in  Asher's  Benj.  of 
Tudela,  ii.  401  J.  The  situation  of  the  three  cities 
Megiddo,  Taanach,  and  Ibleam,  in  the  noble  plain 
of  Jezreel,  was  equally  favorable.  Concerning  the 
first,  it  is  to  he  considered  as  established  that  it 
answers  to  the  old  Legio,  the  modem  Lejjun  (Rob. 
ii.  328;  iii.  118) ;  although  I  am  not  of  the  opin- 
ion that  the  name  Legio,  first  mentioned  by  Kuse- 
bius  and  Jerome,  is  etymologically  derived  from 
Megiddo.  It  appears  much  more  likely  that  Lejjun 
was  an  ancient  popular  mutilation  of  Megiddo, 
which  subsequently  in  the  time  of  the  Romans  be- 
came Latinized  into  Legio.  Taanach  is  confessedly 
the  present  Ta'annuk  (Schubert's  Reise,  iii.  164; 
Rob.  ii.  316,  iii.  117).  The  more  confidently 
may  I  suggest  the  neighboring  Jelameh  as  the  site 
of  Ibleam,  although  not  proposed  as  such  by  these 
travellers.'2  Robinson  reached  this  place  from 
Jenin,  in  about  one  hour's  travel  through  a  fine 
country  (Bib.  Res.  ii.  318  ff.).  Lor3  is  the  well- 
known  Dandiira,  Tantura,  of  the  present  day,  on 
the  coast  (Ratter,  xvi.  608,  etc.  [Gage's  transl.  iv. 
278]).  Josh.xvii.il  names  Endor  also,  of  which 
here  nothing  is  said.     The  same  passage  affirms 

that  "  the  sons  of  Manasseh  could  not  (1??*  S 7) 
drive  out  the  inhabitants."  Evidently,  Manasseh 
depended  for  the  expulsion  of  the  inhabitants  of 
these  cities  upon  the  cooperation  of  Issachar,  by 
whose  territory  they  were  inclosed.  The  example 
of  the  tribes  of  Judah  and  Simeon,  the  latter  of 
whom  was  entirely  surrounded  by  the  former,  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  imitated.  Issachar  is  the 
only  tribe  concerning  which  our  chapter  gives  no 
information.  But  since  in  the  case  of  all  the  tribes, 
except  Judah,  only  those  cities  are  here  enumerated 
out  of  which  the  Canaanites  had  not  been  expelled, 
the  inference  is  that  Issachar  had  done  his  part, 
and  that  the  cities  within  his  limits  which  did  not 
expel  their  inhabitants,  were  just  those  which  be- 
longed to  Manasseh.  The  statement  that  in 
Beth-shean,  Megiddo,  Taanach,  and  Ibleam  the 
Canaanite  remained,  included  therefore  also  all  that 
was  to  be  said  about  Issachar,  and  rendered  further 
mention  unnecessary.  Issachar  possessed  the  mag- 
nificent Plain  of  Jezreel  (peya  neStov),  and  was  on 
that  account  an  agricultural,  peaceable,  solid  tribe. 
And  the  Canaanite  consented  to  continue  to 

dwell.  Wherever  vNVl  occurs,  it  seems  neces- 
sary to  take  it  as  expressing  acquiescence  in  offered 

1  Its  magnificent  position  is  also  celebrated  in  the  Tal- 
*iud,  Erubin,  19  a;  cf.  Ketubolh,  112  a.  See  below  on  ch. 
It. 

'-  [According  to  Bachmann,  Knobel  had  already  proposed 
this  identification.  Keil,  after  Schultz,  suggests  Khirbet- 
Belameh,  half  an  hour  south  of  Jenin.  —  Tr.] 

8  Levy  (Ptwnizische  lmchriften,  i.  35)  thought  that  he 
^ead  this  Dor  on  a  Sidonian  inscription  together  with  Joppa. 
t  is  very  doubtful  whether  he  has  found  any  one  to  agree 
with  him. 

4  [On  the  derivation  and  radical  idea  of  the  word  072, 
opinions  are  very  much  divided.  There  is  no  unanimity 
ven  as  to  the  usage  of  the  word.  Keil  (on  1  Kgs.  iv.  6, 
Sdinb.  ed.  1857)  asserts  that  it  "  nowhere  signifies  vertigal. 
.ribute,  or  socage,  but  in  all  places  only  serf  or  socager." 


proposals  and  conditions.  In  this  sense  it  is  to  be 
taken  Ex.  ii.  21,  where  Moses  consents  to  enter  into 
the  family  of  Jethro.  Upon  the  proposals  made 
by  Micah  to  the  Levite  (Judg.  xvii.  11),  the  latter 
consents  to  remain  with  him.  David  willingly  ac- 
quiesces in  the  proposal  to  wear  the  armor  of  Saul, 
but  finds  himself  as  yet  unaccustomed  to  its  use. 
Manasseh  was  too  weak  to  expel  the  inhabitants 
of  these  cities.  He  therefore  came  to  an  under 
standing  with  them.  He  proposed  that  they  should 
peaceably  submit  themselves.  Unwilling  to  leave 
the  fine  country  which  they  occupied,  and  seeing 
that  all  the  Canaanites  round  about  bad  been  over- 
powered, they  acceded  to  the  proposition. 

Ver.  28.  When  Israel  was  strong,  they  made 
the  Canaanite  tributary.  The  narrator  general- 
izes what  he  has  said  of  Manasseh,  and  applies  it 
to  all  Israel.  The  Canaanite,  wherever  he  was  not 
driven  out,  but  "  consented  "  to  remain,  was  obliged 
to  pay  tribute.  This  lasted,  of  course,  only  so  long 
as  Israel  had  strength  enough  to  command  the  re- 
spect of  the  subject  people.  Similar  relations  be- 
tween conquerors  and  conquered  are  of  frequent 
occurrence  in  history.  The  inhabitants  of  Sparta, 
the  Periceki,  were  made  tributary  by  the  victorious 
immigrant  Dorians,  and  even  after  many  centuries, 
when  Epaminondas  threatened  Sparta,  were  in- 
clined to  make  common  cause  with  the  enemy 
(Manso,  Sparta,  iii.  i.  167).  According  to  Mo- 
hammedan law,  the  unbeliever  who  freely  submits 
himself,  retains  his  property,  but  is  obliged  to  pay 
poll-tax  and  ground-rent  (cf.  Tomauv,  Das  Most. 
Reck,  p.  51).  When  the  Saxons  had  vanquished 
the  Thuringian  nobility,  and  were  not  sufficiently 
numerous  to  cultivate  the  land,  "  they  let  the  peas- 
antry remain,"  says  the  Sachsenspiegtl  (iii.  44), 
and  took  rent  from  them  (cf.  Eichhorn,  Deutsche 
Staats  und  Rechtsy.,  §  15).  The  treatment  which 
the  Israelitish  tribes  now  extended  to  the  Canaan- 
ites, was  afterwards,  in  the  time  of  their  national 
decay,  experienced  by  themselves  (cf.  my  Histori/  of 
the  Jews  in  Ersch  &  Gruber,  II.  xxvii.  7,  etc.).   The 

word  DO,  by  which  the  tribute  imposed  is  desig- 
nated, evidently  means  ground-rent,  and  is  related 
to  the  Sanskrit  mddmetior,  to  measure.  Another 
expression  for  this  form  of  tribute  is  the  Chaldee 

fTTO  (Ezra  iv.  20),  for  which  elsewhere  ^'~ 
appears  (Ezra  iv.  13).  The  Midrash  (Ber.  Rabba, 
p.  57,  a),  therefore,  rightly  explains  the  latter  as 

Vv^'?  i~'?^?)  ground-rent.  The  terms  mensura 
and  mensuraticum,  in  mediaeval  Latin,  were  formed 
in  a  similar  manner.    The  Arabic  3~0,  Talmudic 

njIS,  also,  as  Hammer  observes  (Landerverwali 
des  Chalifats,  p.  119),  mean  tribute  and  corn.4 

But  the  better  view  seems  to  be  that  although  it  is  some 
times  used  concretely  for  socagers  or  bond-servants,  (cf.  1  Kgs 
v.27(13}),  yet  its  proper  and  usual  meaning  is  tribute-sero'c* 
Out  of  the  twenty-three  instances  in  which  the  word  occurs, 
there  is  not  one  in  which  it  can  be  shown  that  it  means 
tribute  in  money  or  products  ;  while  it  is  abundantly  evi 
dent  that  in  many  cases  it  does  mean  compulsory  laboi, 
personal  service.  What  kind  of  service  the  Israelites  here  re- 
quired of  the  Canaanites  does  not  appear.  It  may  have  been 
labor  on  public  works,  or  assistance  rendered  at  certain  timeH 
to  the  individual  agriculturist.  This  appears  at  least  as 
probable  as  Bachmann's  suggestion  that  perhaps  'f  the  Ca- 
naanite merchants  "  were  expected  to  furnish  certain  tr  com- 
mercial supplies  and  services."  Our  author's  view  in  fa  vol 
of  "  ground-rent."'  caouot  be  said  to  derive  the  support  of 
analogy    from   his  historical   references.     For  as  Bacnmanc 


46 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


[But  did  not  drive  them  out.  Bertheau  : 
''  ittT-nrrsb  E^/irn :  the  emphatic  expression 
by  means  of  the  infinitive  before  the  finite  verb,  we 
regard  as  indicative  of  an  implied  antithesis ;  but, 
although  Israel,  when  it  became  strong,  had  the 
power  to  execute  the  law  of  Moses  to  destroy  the 
Canaanites,  it  nevertheless  did  not  destroy  them." 

•  Tk.] 

Ver.  29.  And  Ephraim  did  not  drive  out 
the  Canaanite  that  dwelt  in  Gezer.  The  situa- 
tion of  Gezer  may  be  exactly  determined  from 
Josh.  xvi.  3.  The  border  of  Ephraim  proceeds 
from  Lower  Beth-horon,  by  way  of  Gezer,  to  the 
sea.  Now,  since  the  position  of  Beth-horon  is  well 
ascertained  (Beit  'Ur  et-Tatha),  the  border,  run- 
ning northwest,  past  Ludd,  which  belonged  to  Ben- 
jamin, must  have  touched  the  sea  to  the  north  of 
Japho,  which  likewise  lay  within  the  territory  of 
Benjamin.  On  this  line,  four  or  five  miles  east  of 
Joppa,  there  still  exists  a  place  called  Jesor  (Jazour 
Yazur),  which  can  be  nothing  else  than  Gezer, 
although  Bertheau  does  not  recognize  it  as  such 
(p.  41  ;  nor  Kitter,  xvi.  127  [Gage's  Transl.  iii. 
245]).  It  is  not  improbable  that  it  is  the  Gazara 
of  Jerome  (p.  137,  ed.  Parthey),  in  quarto  miUiario 
Nicopoleos  contra  septentrionem,  although  the  dis- 
tance does  not  appear  to  be  accurately  given.  The 
Ganzur  of  Esthor  ha-Parchi  (ii.  434),  on  the  con- 
trary, is  entirely  incorrect.  The  position  of  Gezer 
enables  us  also  to  see  why  Ephraim  did  not  drive 
out  the  inhabitants.  The  place  was  situated  in  a 
fine,  fertile  region.  It  is  still  surrounded  by  noble 
corn-fields  and  rich  orchards.  The  agricultural 
population  of  such  fruitful  regions  were  readily 
permitted  to  remain  for  the  sake  of  profit,  especially 
by  warlike  tribes  who  had  less  love  and  skill  for 
such  peaceful  labors  than  was  possessed  by  Issa- 
char. 

Ver.  30.  Zebulon  did  not  drive  out  the  in- 
habitants of  Kitron  nor  the  inhabitants  of 
NahaloL  This  statement  will  only  confirm  the 
remarks  just  made.  There  is  no  reason  for  con- 
tradicting the  Talmud  (Mec/illa,  6  a),  when  it  defi- 
nitely identifies  Kitron  with  the  later  Zippori, 
Sepphoris,  the  present  Seffurieh.  As  the  present 
village  still  lies  at  the  foot  of  a  castle-crowned  emi- 
nence, and  as  the  Rabbinic  name  Zippori  (Tsip- 

pori,  from  ""^SS,  "a  bird,  which  hovers  aloft") 
indicates  an  elevated  situation,  the  ancient  name 
yvit?|?  (from  -1^i3=-,£?)  may  perhaps  be  sup- 
posed to  describe  the  city  as  the  "  mountain- 
crown  "  of  the  surrounding  district.  The  tribe  of 
Zebulon,  it  is  remarked  in  the  Talmud,  need  not 
commiserate  itself,  since  it  has  Kitron,  that  is,  Sep- 
phoris, a  district  rich  in  milk  and  honey.  And  in 
truth  SefifQrieh  does  lie  on  the  southern  limit  of  the 
beautiful  plain  el-Buttauf,  the  present  beauty  and 
richness  of  which,  as  last  noted  by  Robinson  (ii. 
336),  must  formerly  have  been  much  enhanced  by 
cultivation.  In  connection  with  this,  it  will  also 
be  possible  to  locate  Nahalol  more  definitely,  l'hi- 
lologically,  it  is  clearly  to  be  interpreted  "  pasture" 
(Isa.  vii.   19).      It  answers  perhaps  to   the   later 

justly  remarks,  "  the  case  in  which  the  conquerors  of  a 
country  leave  the  earlier  population  in  possession  of  their 
lands  on  condition  of  paying  ground-rent,  is  the  reverse  of 
what  takes  place  here,  where  a  people,  themselves  agricul- 
turists, take  personal  possession  of  the  open  country,  and 
concede  a  few  cities  to  the  old  inhabitants.*'  It  is  probable, 
However,  that  the  situation  varied  considerably  in  different 
localities,  cf.  ver.  31  f.  and  ver.  34.  —  Tr.] 

1   Wetjstein  (Haiimn,  p.  881  writes  :   "Of  Ziphron  (Arab. 


Abilin,  a  place  from  which  a  wady  somewhat  U 
the  northwest  of  Sefiurieh  has  its  name.  For  thii 
name  comes  from  Abel,  which  also  means  pasture. 
This  moreover  suggests  the  explanation  why  from 
just  these  two  places  the  Canaanites  were  not  ex- 
pelled. They  both  became  tributary,  and  remained 
the  occupants  and  bailiffs  of  their  pastures  ant? 
meadows. 

Vers.  31,  32.  Asher  did  not  drive  out  tha 
inhabitants  of  Accho,  Zidon,  Ahlab,  Achzib, 
Helbah,  Aphik,  Rehob.  The  whole  history  of 
Israel  can  be  nothing  else  than  a  fulfilling  of  the 
spirit  of  the  Mosaic  law.  The  division  of  the  land 
of  Canaan  is  a  part  of  this  fulfillment.  This  divis- 
ion therefore  cannot  have  respect  only  to  the  terri- 
tory already  acquired,  but  must  proceed  according 
to  the  promise.  The  boundaries  of  the  land  des- 
tined for  Israel  were  indicated  by  Moses.  The  ter- 
ritories which  they  circumscribe  must  be  conquered. 
Whatever  part  is  not  gained,  the  failure  is  the 
fault  of  Israel  itself.  The  boundaries  indicated, 
were  the  outlines  of  a  magnificent  country.  Splen- 
did coast-lands,  stately  mountains,  wealthy  agri- 
cultural districts,  rich  in  varieties  of  products  and 
beauty,  inclosed  by  natural  boundaries.  The 
whole  sea-coast  with  its  harbors  —  Phoenicia  not 
excepted  —  was  included  ;  the  northeastern  bound- 
ary was  formed  by  the  desert,  and  lower  down  by 
the  river.  The  border  lines  of  the  land  of  Israel, 
drawn  Num.  xxxiv.,  are  based  upon  the  permanent 
landmarks  which  it  offers ;  they  are  accurate  geo- 
graphical definitions,  obtained  from  the  wandering 
tribes  of  the  land.  It  seems  to  me  that  it  is  only 
from  this  point  of  view  that  the  hitherto  frequently 
mistaken  northern  boundary  of  the  land,  as  given 
Num.  xxxiv.  7-9,  can  be  correctly  made  out. 
"  And  this  shall  be  your  north  border,"  it  is  there 
said  :  "  from  the  great  sea  ye  shall  take  Mount 
Hor  as  your  landmark  ;  thence  follow  the  road  as 
far  as  Hamath ;  and  the  border  shall  end  in  Zedad  : 
thence  it  goes  on  to  Ziphron,1  and  ends  in  Hazar- 
enan."  The  range  of  Mount  Casius,  whose  south- 
ernmost prominence  lifts  itself  up  over  Laodicea 
(the  present  Ladikieh),  forms  the  natural  northern 
boundary  of  Phoenicia.     This  is  the  reason  why 

on  coins  Laodicea  was  called  1^332  GN,  the  "  Be- 
ginning of  Canaan,"  as  it  might  lie  translated.  It 
is  therefore  also  from  the  foot  of  this  range  that 
the  northern  boundary  of  Israel  sets  out.  The 
name  Mount  Hor  is  simply  the  ancient  equivalent 
of  Mount  Casius  and  also  of  the  later  Jebel  Akra, 
which  latter  term  furnishes  a  general  designation 
for  every  mountain  since  the  Greek  Akra  was  ex- 
plained by  the  Arabic  Jebel.  From  the  foot  of  this 
mountain    ancient   caravan   roads    (suggested    by 

flt^n  S2  .)  lead  to  Hamath,  and  from  Hamath 
to  the  desert.  At  present,  as  in  the  time  of  the 
geographer  Ptolemy,  who  indicated  their  course, 
these  roads  pass  over  Zedad,  at  the  western  en- 
trance of  the  desert,  the  modern  Sitdud  (Bitter, 
xvi.  5  [Gage's  Transl.  iii.  175);  xvii.  1443,  etc.). 
Thence  the  border  went  southward  till  it  ended  > 
Hazar-enan,  the  last  oasis,  distinguished  by  fertile 
meadows  and  good  water  (Euan),  where  the  two 

Zifran)  wide-spread  ruins  are  yet  existing.  According  to  my 
inquiries,  the  place  lies  fourteen  hours  N.  E.  of  Damascus, 
near  the  Palmyra  road.  It  haa  not  yet,  I  think,  been  vis 
ited  by  any  traveller."'  It  is  impracticable  here  to  enter 
into  further  geographical  discussions,  but  the  opinion  of 
Keil  (on  Num.  xxxiv.  7-9}  who  rejects  the  above  determina- 
tion, cannot  be  a  :cepted  as  decisive,  if  for  no  other  reason 
on  account  of  tie  general  idea  by  which  he  ie  •videntl* 
influenced. 


CHAPTER    I     >7-3n. 


V 


principal  roads  from  Damascus  and  Haleb  to  Pal- 
myra meet,  and  where  the  proper  Syrian  desert  in 
which  Palmyra  (Tadmor)  is  situated  begins.  The 
name  Cefiere  on  the  Tabula  Peutingeriana,  Zoaria 
(for  the  Goaria  of  Ptolemy),  at  present  Carietein, 
Kuryctein  (Bitter,  xvii.  1 4o7,  etc.),  may  remind  us 
of  Hazor. 

Tadmor  itself  did  not  lay  beyond  the  horizon  of 
Israelitish  views.  Whithersoever  David  and  Solo- 
mon turned  their  steps,  they  moved  everywhere 
within  the  circle  of  original  claims.  Israel  was  not 
to  conquer  in  unbridled  arbitrariness :  they  were 
to  gain  those  districts  which  God  had  promised 
them.  Conquest,  with  them,  was  fulfillment.  The 
eastern  border  lias  the  same  natural  character. 
From  Hazar-enan  it  runs  to  Shepham,  along  the 
edge  of  the  desert  to  Riblah  (the  present  Ribleh) 
•'on  the  east  side  of  Ain  "  (Rob.  iii.  534),  along 
the  range  of  Antilebanon,  down  the  Jordan  to  the 
Dead  Sea.  These  remarks  it  was  necessary  to 
make  here  where  we  must  treat  of  the  territories 
of  Asher  and  Naphtali,  the  northwestern  and  north- 
eastern divisions  of  Israel.  For  it  must  be  assumed 
that  Asher's  territory  was  considered  to  extend  as 
tar  up  as  Mount  Hor,  —  that  the  whole  coast  from 
Accho  to  Gabala  was  ascribed  to  him.  This 
coast-region  Asher  was  not  sufficiently  strong 
and  numerous  to  command.  The  division  of  the 
land  remained  ideal  nowhere  more  than  in  the 
case  of  the  Phoenician  cities.  Nowhere,  conse- 
quently, was  the  remark  of  ver.  32  more  applica- 
ble :  "  the  Asherite  dwelt  among  the  inhabitants 
of  the  land  ;  "  whereas  elsewhere  the  Canaanites 
dwelt  among  Israel,  though  even  that  was  against 
the  Mosaic  commands.  Nor  can  it  be  supposed 
that  the  seven  cities  expressly  named  were  the  only 
ones  out  of  which  Asher  did  not  expel  the  Canaan- 
ites. For  who  can  think  that  this  had  been  done 
in  the  case  of  Tyre,  the  "  fortified  city  "  (Josh.  xix. 
29)  !  The  names  are  rather  to  be  considered  as 
those  of  townships  and  metropolitan  cities,  so  that 
when  Zidon  is  mentioned  other  cities  to  the  south 
and  north  are  included  as  standing  under  Sidonian 
supremacy.  The  express  mention  of  Tyre,  in 
Josh.  xix.  29,  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  passage 
was  giving  the  course  of  the  boundaries.  For  the 
same  reason,  Joshua  xix.  is  not  a  complete  enu- 
meration of  places  ;  for  of  the  seven  mentioned 
here,  two  at  least  (Accho  and  Ahlab)  are  wanting 
there.  That  Accho  cannot  have  been  accidentally 
overlooked,  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  the  bor- 
der is  spoken  of  as  touching  Carmel,  and  that 
mention  is  made  of  Achzib.  The  relation  of  Asher 
to  the  Phoenician  territory  was  in  general  the  fol- 
lowing :  A  number  of  places  (Josh.  xix.  30  speaks 
of  twenty  two)  had  been  wholly  taken  possession 
of  by  the  tribe  Outside  of  these,  the  Asherites 
lived  widely  scattered  among  the  inhabitants,  mak- 
ing no  attempts  to  drive  them  out.  The  seven 
cities  mentioned  auove,  especially  those  on  the 
coast,  are  to  be  regarded  as  districts  in  which  they 
dwelt  along  with  the  Canaanites.  We  have  no 
reason  for  confining  these  to  the  south  of  Sidon. 
On  the  contrary,  Esthor  ha-Parchi  (ii.  413-415) 
was  right  in  maintaining  that  cities  of  the  tribe  of 
Asher  must  be  acknowledged  as  far  north  as  Lao- 
dicea.  The  statements  in  Joshua  for  the  most  part 
mention  border-places  of  districts  farther  inland,  in 
which  the  tribe  dwelt,  and  from  which  the  bound- 
ary line  ran  westward  to  the  sea.     Thus,  at  one 


time  the  line  meandered  (3r*')  to  Zidon  (xix.  28) ; 
then  it  came  back,  and  ran  toward  Tyre  (ver.  29). 
Nut  till  the   words,  "  the   ends  were   at  the   sea, 

"V  • ;  ^  '3Q1?>"  do  we  get  a  sea-boundary  from 
north  to  south.  I  translate  this  phrase,  "  from 
Chebel  towards  Achzib:"  it  includes  the  whole 
Phoenician  tract.  True,  the  whole  enumeration 
implies  that  most  of  the  places  lay  farther  south 
than  Zidon,  in  closer  geographical  connection  with 
the  rest  of  Israel.  But  places  higher  up  are  also 
named,  fur  the  very  purpose  of  indicating  the  ideal 
boundaries.  Among  these  are  the  places  men- 
tioned ver.  30,  two  of  which  again  appear  in  our 
passage.  Asher  did  not  drive  out  the  inhabitants 
of  Accho  (Ptolemais,  the  present  Akka),  but  dwelt 
among  them.  To  the  north  of  this  Has  Achzib 
(Kcdippa,  the  present  ez-Zib).  They  dwelt  with 
the  inhabitants  of  Zidon  in  their  dominion.  They 
did  not  expel  the  inhabitants  of  Aphik  (Aphecaj, 
on  the  Adonis  river  (Bitter,  xvii- 553,  etc.),  not- 
withstanding the  ancient  idolatry  there  practiced, 
on  account  of  which,  evidently,  it  is  mentioned. 
Rehob,  since  it  is  here  named,  must  have  been  a 
not   unimportant  place.     The   Syrian   translation 

of  Rehob  is  S^72,  KiTtabs,  paltia,  paltusa 
(plat:  a1).  This  accounts  for  the  fact  that  the 
Greeks  and  Romans  speak  of  an  ancient  Paltos, 
otherwise  unknown  (Bitter,  xvii.  890),  and  of 
which  the  present  Beldeh  may  still  remind  us. 
Hitherto,  this  has  escaped  attention.  It  was  re- 
marked above  that  the  sea-boundary  is  drawn, 
Josh,  xix.,  "  from  Chebel  to  Achzib.""    With  this 

Chebel    the   na^H    (Chelbah,   E.   V.    Helbah), 

probably  to  be  read  n.;3r!  (Cheblah),  of  our 
passage,  may  perhaps  be  identified.  It  is  the  Ga- 
bala of  Strabo  and  Pliny,  the  Gahellum  of  the 
crusaders,  the  present  Jebele,  which  lies  to  the 
north  of  Paltos,  and  below  Laodicea,  and  in  Phoe- 
nician times  was  the  seat  of  the  worship  of  the 
goddess  Thuro  (Ritter,  xvii.  893;  Movers,  ii.  1, 
117  ft").  There  is  but  one  of  the  seven  cities  of 
which  we  have  not  yet  spoken,  namely,  Ahlab, 
named  along  with  Achzib.  It  is  very  probable 
that  this  is  Giscala,  situated  in  the  same  latitude 
with  Achzib.  but  farther  inland.  In  Talmudic 
times  the  name  of  this  place  was  Gush  Chaleb;  at 
present  there  is  nothing  but  the  modern  name 
el-Jish  to  remind  us  of  it. 

Ver.  33.  Naphtali  did  not  drive  out  the  in- 
habitants of  Beth-shemesh  and  Beth-anath. 
The  names  of  both  these  places  allude  to  an  idola- 
trous worship,  and  are  also  found  in  the  tribe  or 

Judah.     The   name   of  Beth-anath  (i~QV    ST2), 

"  House  of  Echo,"  from  ""^2?,  "to  answer,"  indi- 
cates that  its  situation  was  that  of  the  present 
Banias,  the  ancient  Paneas.  The  inscriptions  on 
the  grotto  called  Panium,  still  point  to  the  echo. 
One  of  them  is  dedicated  to  the  "echo-loving" 
(ipiAeiriix?)  Pan.  The  love  of  Pan  for  the  nymph 
Echo  was  a  widely-spread  myth.  Another  inscrip- 
tion tells  of  a  man  who  dedicated  a  niche  (Koyxv) 
to  the  Echo  (Commentary  on  Seetzeii's  Reisen.  'v 
161,  162).  The  introduction  in  Greek  times  of 
Pan  worship  in  Banias,  is  moreover  also  explained 
by  the  fact  that  the  name  Bethanas  (th),  required* 
only  an  easy  popular  corruption  to  make  it  Paneas 


.  _     _,  ,  ^'-^-,    L      L*.«..t,..l*M      Cnald..  p.  1740),  but  also  in  proper 

1  The  Targum  also  translates  2PT    by    NrWT2"     G       x  11 

tot  only  when   use<i  as  a  common  noun  (cf.  Bustorf,  Lex. 


names,  as  Rehobotli  \' 


48 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES 


Robinson  (Bib.  Res.  iii.  409)  has  again  taken  up 
the  view,  already  rejected  by  Ritter  (xvii.  229), 
which  identifies  Paneas  with  the  repeatedly  occur- 
ring Baal-gad,  and  which  on  closer  inspection  is 
simply  impossible.    Joshua  xi.  17  says  of  Baal-gad 

that  it  lay  in  the  Bik-ath  (n?f?2)  Lebanon,  under 
Mount  Hcrraon.  Joshua  xii.  7  speaks  of  it  simply 
as  Baal-gad  in  the  Bikath  Lebanon.  The  valley 
thus  spoken  of  is  none  other  than  the  Buka'a,  i.  e. 
"  Hollow  Syria."  There  is  no  oth^r  hollow  region 
that  could  be  thus  indicated.  The  further  deter- 
mination tarhath  har  Chermon  indicates,  quite  con- 
sistently with  the  meaning  of  tachath,  which  fre- 
quently combines  the  signification  of  "behind" 
with  that  of  "  under,"  the  Lebanon  valley  behind 
Mount  Hermon,  i.  e.  on  the  northern  base  of  Her- 
mon,  for  on  its  southern  base  there  can  be  no  Leb- 
anon valley.  This  alone  would  suffice  to  transfer 
Baal-gad  to  the  Buka'a.  But  in  Joshua  xiii.  5  a  Leb- 
anon is  spoken  of  "  east  of  Baal-gad  under  Mount 
Hermon."  Now,  a  Lebanon  east  of  Baal-gad  there 
can  be  only  if  Baal-gad  lies  in  the  Buka'a ;  and 
there  being  a  Lebanon  on  the  east,  only  the  north- 
ern base  of  Mount  Hermon  can  be  meant  by  the 
phrase  "under  Mount  Hermon"  (cf  below,  on  ch.  iii. 
3).  Now,  although  there  ought  to  be  no  doubt  that 
Baal-gad  lay  in  the  "  Hollow,"  yet,  the  addition 
"  under  Mount  Hermon  "  cannot  have  been  made 
without  a  reason.  It  was  intended  to  distinguish 
Baal-gad  from  Baal-bek,  which  latter,  since  it  lies 
in  the  northern  part  of  the  Buka'a,  could  not  prop- 
erly be  said  to  lie  on  the  northern  base  of  Hermon. 
We  scarcely  need  to  hesitate,  therefore,  to  recog- 
nize in  Baal-gad  the  position  of  the  later  Chalets 
(ad  Libanum)  whose  site  is  marked  by  fountains 
and  temple-ruins.  "  The  temple  which  stands  on 
the  summit  of  the  northernmost  hill,  belongs  evi- 
dently to  an  older  and  severer  style  of  architecture 
than  those  at  Baalbek.  Its  position  is  incompara- 
ble "  (Ritter,  xvii.  185  ;  Rob.  iii.  492,  etc  ). 

Besides  the  inhabitants  of  Beth-anath,  the  tribe 
of  Naphtali  failed  to  drive  out  those  of  Beth- 
shemesh  also.  There  was  a  celebrated  place  of  the 
same  name  in  Judah,  and  still  another,  unknown 
one  in  Issachar.  Concerning  the  tribe  of  Naph- 
tali also  the  remark  is  made  that  they  dwelt  among 
the  Canaanites,  the  inhabitants  of  the  land.  Their 
assigned  boundaries  likewise  went  far  up  to  the 
north.  They  inclosed  Coelo-Syria,  as  was  already 
remarked.  The  peculiar  mode  in  which  Beth- 
shemesh  is  here  spoken  of,  along  -with  Beth-anath, 
is  doubtless  intended  to  point  it  out  as  a  remark- 
able seat  of  idol  worship,  whose  people  neverthe- 
less Israel  did  not  expel,  but  only  rendered  tribu- 
tary.  The  most  celebrated  place  of  tile  north  was 
tin-  temple-city  in  the  "  Hollow,"  —  Beth-shemesh, 
as  later  Syrian  inhabitants  still  called  it,  —  Baal- 
bek as  we,  following  the  prevailing  usage  of  its 
people,  Heliopolis  as  the  Greeks,  named  it.  The 
Egyptian  Heliopolis  also  bore  the  name  Beth- 
shemesh,  House  of  the  Sun.  Baalbek  answers  to 
the  name  Baalath,1  to  which,  as  to  Tadmor,  Solo- 
mon extended  his  wisdom  and  his  architecture. 

Vers.  34,  35.  And  the  Amorite  crowded  the 
sons  of  Dan  into  the  mountains.  The  domains 
of  the  tribe  of  Dm  lay  alongside  of  those  of  Benja 

1  1  Kgs.  is.  IS  Others  refer  this  to  Baalath  in  the 
trilie  of  Dan.  Cf  Keil  on  Joskua  xix.  44,  and  on  1  Kgs. 
■X.  18. 

2  Compare  the  Syrian  K^^tt?,  "  an/raclus  inter  duos 
nmfu.'*     Cf.  Castelli,  p.  912. 

8  [Bachmann  :  "  That  the  House  of  Joseph  used  its  greater 
rtreogrh  not  to  exterminate  the  Amorite  cities,  but  only  to 


min,  between  Judah  on  the  south  and  Ephraim  oe 
the  north.  They  should  have  reached  to  the  sea ; 
but  the  warlike  dwellers  on  the  western  plain, 
provided  with  the  appliances  of  military  art,  bad 
resisted  even  Judah.  The  plain  which  we  are  here 
told  the  sons  of  Dan  could  not  take,  seems  to  have 
been  the  magnificent  and  fertile  Merj  Ibn  Omeir, 
which  opens  into  the  great  western  plain.  This 
may  be  inferred  from  the  remark  in  ver.  35  :  "  The 
Amorite  consented  to  remain  on  Mount  Heres,  in 
\ijalon,  and  in  Shaalbim."  This  plain,  as  Rob- 
inson (iii.  144)  accurately  observes,  reaches  to  the 
base  of  the  steep  mountain  wall,  on  the  top  of 
which  Saris  is  the  first  place  met  with.  It  must  be 
this  mountain  land  that  is  meant  by  Mount  Heres. 
Southward  of  it  is  the  ridge  on  which  Yalo  lies, 
which  is  justly  considered  to  be  the  ancient  Aija- 
lon  Perhaps  no  place  answers  more  closely  to  the 
Shaalbim  of  our  passage,  than  Amwas  (Emmaus, 
Nicopolis),  twenty  minutes  distant  from  the  coni- 
cal Tell  Latron.  It  is  evident  that  □",2?2tt7  has 
nothing  to  do  with  ^WtP,  "  fox,"  but  belongs 
to    the    Chaldaie   2bt?,    "to   connect,"  'P'Vjp 

"  steps,"  -  to  which  the  Hebrew  323J  corresponds 
The  position  of  Amwas  is  "  on  the  gradual  decliv- 
ity of  a  rocky  hill,"  with  an  extensive  view  of  the 
plain  (Rob.  iii.  146),  "where,"  as  Jerome  says, 
"  the  mountains  of  Judah  begin  to  rise."  When 
Jerome  speaks  of  a  tower  called  Selebi,  he  proba- 
bly refers  to  the  neighboring  castle  Latron. 

The  sons  of  Dan  were  not  only  unable  to  com- 
mand the  plain,  but  also  on  some  points  of  the 
hill-country  they  suffered  the  inhabitants  to  remain. 

Har  Heres  0"?n  ""'H)  means  the  "  mountain  of 
the  Sun  ;"  but  the  attempts  to  bring  its  position 
into  connection  with  Ain  Shems  cannot  succeed, 
since  that  lies  much  farther  south,  in  the  valley. 
Heres  was  the  name  of  the  mountain  chain  which 
at  Beth-horon  enters  the  territory  of  Ephraim,  and 
on  which  Joshua  was  buried.  Possibly,  the  name 
Saris  or  Soris  contains  a  reminiscence  of  it.  Tliis 
explains  the  remark,  that  "  the  hand  of  the  sons  of 
Joseph  became  powerful  and  made  the  Amorites 
tributary."  That  which  was  impossible  for  the 
tribe  of  Dan,  Ephraim  from  their  own  mountains 
performed.8 

Ver.  30.  The  border  of  the  Amorite  re- 
mained from  the  Scorpion-terrace,  from  Sela 
and  onward.  This  peculiar  statement  is  explained 
by  the  composition  of  the  whole  tableau  presented 
by  the  first  chapter.  It  had  been  unfolded  how  far 
the  tribes  of  Israel  had  performed  the  task  ap- 
pointed by  Moses,  by  taking  the  territories  whose 
borders  he  had  indicated.  For  this  reason,  it  had 
been  stated  concerning  all  the  tribes,  what  they 
had  not  yet  taken,  or  had  not  yet  wholly  national- 
ized. Neither  the  eastern,  nor  the  northern  and 
western  boundaries  had  been  hitherto  fully  realized. 
Only  the  southern  border  had  been  held  fast.  This 
line,  as  drawn  Num.  xxxiv.  3  ff.,  actually  se» 
arated  Israel  and  the  heathen  nations.  Ver.  36  is, 
as  it  were,  a  citation  from  the  original  Mosaic 
document.  After  beginning  the  sentence  by  say- 
render  them  tributary,  thus  benefitting  itself  more  than 
the  tribe  of  Dan,  sets  forth  the  unsatisfactory  nature  of 
their  assistance,  and  conveys  a  just  reproach.  Meanwhile, 
however,  it  seems  that  the  subjugation  of  the  Amorite  by  the 
House  of  Joseph  was  so  far  at  least  of  use  to  Dan  as  to  en- 
able them  to  reach  the  coast,  in  partial  possession  of  which, 
at  least,  we  find  the  tribe  it;  ch.  v.  17.''  But  cf.  our  authoj 
in  lot.  —  Tit.] 


CHAPTER   I.    27-30. 


49 


i\g  "  and  the  border  of  the  Amorite  went  from 
Akrabbim  and  Sela,"  it  is  brought   to  a  sudden 

close  by  the  addition  ^T'^^r>))  "and  onward,  be- 
cause it  is  taken  for  granted  that  the  further  course 
of  the  border  to  the  "Brook  of  Egypt  "  is  known 
from  the  determinations  of  Moses  as  recorded  in 
Numbers.  There  it  was  said,  "  Your  border  shall 
go  to  the  south  of  Maaleh  Akrabbim  (at  the  south- 
ern extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea),  pass  through  Zin, 
and  its  end  shall  be  to  the  south  of  Kadesh-barnea." 
Here,  the  statement  is  somewhat  more  exact,  inas- 
much as  the  border  is  prolonged  from  Akrabbim 
eastward  to  Sela,  i.  e.  Petra.  From  Akrabbim 
westward  it  proceeds  along  the  already  indicated 
route,  over  Kadesh-barnea,  Hazar-addar,  and  Az- 
mon,  to  the  "Brook  of  Egypt"  (Wady  el-Arish, 
Rhinocorura).  This  course  the  writer  deemed  suf- 
ficiently indicated  by  the  words  "  and  onward."  l 

HOMILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

Obedience  and  love  toward  God  are  wrecked  on 
greediness  and  love  of  ease.  Immediately  after  the 
death  of  Joshua,  the  children  of  Israel  asked  after 
God.  But  very  soon  they  ceased  to  do  that  which 
Moses,  and,  in  his  name,  Joshua  had  commanded 
them.  Their  business  was  to  conquer,  and  not  to 
tremble  at  strongholds  or  chariots  of  iron.  They 
were  to  expel,  and  not  to  take  tribute.  But  their 
heart  was  no  longer  entirely  with  their  God  They 

i  [The  foregoing  paragraph,  rendered  somewhat  obscure 
by  its  brevity,  was  explained  by  the  author,  in  reply  to 
eoine  inquiries,  as  follows:  "I  endeavored  to  show  that 
the  idea  of  the  passage  is,  that  the  original  boundary  lines 
of  Israel,  as  drawn  by  Moses,  had  nowhere  been  held  against 
the  Amorite,  i.  e.  the  original  inhabitants,  except  only  in 
the  south.  Everywhere  else,  the  inhabitants  of  Canaan, 
especially  the  Amorite,  had  thus  far  prevented  the  Israelites 
from  taking  full  possession  of  the  land  ;  but  in  the  south 
the  boundary  between  Israel  and  the  Amorite  remained  as 
drawn  by  Moses,  in  Num.  xxxiv.  3.  I  would  ask  that  in 
connection  with  this  the  remarks  under  vers.  31,  32,  be  con- 
sidered. The  whole  first  chapter  is  an  exposition  of  the 
fact  that  Israel  had  not  yet  attained  to  complete  possession 
of  Canaan.  It  is  a  spiritual-geographical  picture  of  what 
Israel  had  not  yet  acquired,  and  what  nevertheless  it  should 
possess."  In  other  words,  Dr.  Cassel's  idea  is,  that  the 
main  thought  of  ch.  i.  may  be  expressed  in  two  sentences: 

1.  On  the  west,  north,  and  east  Israel  did  not  actually 
realize  the  assigned  boundary  lines  between  itself  and  the 
original  inhabitants  — the  term  Amorite  being  used  in  the 
wider  sense    it  sometimes  has.     Cf.  Gage's    Ritter.  ii.  125. 

2.  On  the  south,  the  Mosaic  line  was  made  good,  and  con- 
tinued to  be  held.  The  first  of  these  sentences  is  expressed 
indirectly,  by  means  of  illustrative  instances,  in  vers.  4-35  ; 
the  second,  by  direct  and  simple  statement,  in  ver.  36.  In 
that  verse,  the  narrative  which  in  ver.  9  set  out  from  Ju- 
dah  on  its  northward  course,  returns  to  its  starting-point, 
and  completes  what  might  be  called  its  tour  of  boundary  in- 
spection, by  remarking  that  the  southern  boundary  (known 
as  southern  by  the  course  ascribed  to  it)  corresponded  to  the 
Mosaic  determinations.  Ver.  36,  therefore,  connects  itself 
with  the  entire  previous  narrative,  and  not  particularly  with 
vera.  34,  35. 

This  explanation  labors,  however,  under  at  least  one  very 
ferious  difficulty.  It  assumes  that  in  the  expression  tr  border 
of  the  Amorite,'1  the  gen.  is  an  adjective  gen.,  making  the 
phrase  mean  the  Amoritish  (Canaanitish)  border,  just  as  we 
«peak  of  the  (t  Canadian  border,"  meaning  the  border  of  the 
U.  S.  over  against  Canada.  But  in  expressions  of  this  kind, 
the  gen.  is  always  the  genitive  of  the  possessor,  so  that  the 
border  of  the  Amorite,  Ammonite,  etc.,  indicates  the  boun- 
dary of  the  land  held  by  the  Amorite,  Ammonite,  etc.  It 
teems  necessary,  therefore,  with  Bertheau,  Keil,  Bachmann, 
■tc.,  to  read  this  verse  in  connection  with  vers.  34,  35,  and  to 
tnd  in  it  a  note  of  the  extant  of  territory  held    by  the  Am. 


forgot,  not  only  that  they  were  to  purify  the  land, 
and  alone  control  it,  but  also  why  they  were  to  do 
this.  They  were  indulgent  to  idolatry,  because 
the  worm  was  already  gnawing  at  their  own  re 
ligion.  They  no  longer  thought  of  the  danger  of 
being  led  astray,  because  they  were  unmindful  of 
the  word  which  demanded  obedience.  Perfect  obe- 
dience is  the  only  safe  way.  Every  departure  from 
it  leads  downhill  into  danger. 

Thus  we  have  it  explained  why  so  many  under- 
takings of  Christians  and  of  the  church  fail,  even 
while  the  truth  is  still  confessed.  The  word  of  God 
has  not  lost  its  power;  but  the  people  who  have  it 
on  their  tongues  do  not  thoroughly  enter  into  its 
life.  The  fear  of  God  is  still  ever  the  beginning  of 
wisdom  ;  but  it  must  not  be  mixed  with  the  fear  of 
men.  Preaching  is  still  ever  effective ;  but  respect 
to  tribute  and  profitable  returns  must  not  weaken 
it.  Perfect  obedience  has  still  ever  its  victory  ;  but 
that  which  does  not  belong  to  God  comes  into  judg- 
ment, even  though  connected  with  Christian  mut- 
ters. Israel  still  confessed  God,  though  it  allowed 
the  tribes  of  Canaan  to  remain  ;  but  nominal  ser 
vice  is  not  enough.  When  confession  and  life  do 
not  agree,  the  life  must  bear  the  consequences. 

Starke  :  We  men  often  do  not  at  all  know  how 
to  use  aright  the  blessings  which  God  gives,  but 
abuse  them  rather  to  our  own  hurt.  —  The  same  : 
Our  corrupt  nature  will  show  mercy  only  there 
where  severity  should  be  used,  and  on  the  other 
hand  is  altogether  rough  and  hard  where  gentle- 

orite.  The  question  then  arises,  how  it  is  to  be  explained 
We  take  for  granted  that  the  Maaleh  Akrabbim  of  this 
verse  is  the  same  as  that  in  Num.  xxxiv.  4  (a  line  of  cliffs, 
a  few  miles  below  the  Dead  Sea,  dividing  the  Ghor  from  the 
Arabah,  see  Rob.  ii.  120),  and  is  not,  as  some  have  thought, 
to  be  sought  in  the  town  Akrabeh,  a  short  distance  S.  E.  of 
Nabulus    (Rob.    iii.   296).     The   other  point   mentioned    Is 

V/'OTl,  the  Rock.  Commentators  generally  take  this  to 
be  Petra,  in  Arabia  Petra?a  ;  but  the  difficulties  in  the 
way  of  this  view  are  insurmountable.  In  the  first  place 
we  never  hear  of  Amorites  (take  it  in  the  wider  or 
narrower    sense)    so    far    south  as    Petra,    in    the    midst 

of  the  territories  of  Edom.  In  the  next  place,  H  73?Q 
means  upward,  i.  e.  under  the  geographical  conditions  of 
this  verse,  northward  (Dr.  Cassel's  onward,  i.  e.  downward 
to  the  sea,  could  scarcely  be  defended).  Now,  a  line  run- 
ning from  Akrabbim  to  Petra,  and  thence  northward,  would 
merely  return  on  its  own  track,  and  would  after  all  leave  the 
Amorite  territories  undefined  on  just  that  side  where  a  defi- 
nition was  most  needed  because  least  obvious,  namely,  the 
southern.  It  seems,  therefore,  altogether  preferable  (with  the 
Targ.,  Kurtz,  Hist.  O.  Cov.  iii.  239,  Keil,  and  Bachm.)  to  take 

3?73i"T  as  an  appellative,  and  to  find  in  it  a  second  point 
for  a  southern  boundary  line.  Kurtz  and  Keil  identify  it 
with rc  the  (well-known)  rock  "  at  Kadesh  (the  Kudes  of  Row- 
lands, cf.  Williams,  Holy  City,  i.  463  ff.),  from  which  Mosea 
caused  the  water  to  flow,  Num.  xx.  8.  Bachmann  prefers 
the  "bald  mountain  that  ascends  toward  Seir  "  (Josh.  xi.  17), 
whether  it  be  the  chalk-mountain  Madurah  (Rob.  ii.  179), 
or,  what  he  deems  more  suitable,  the  northern  wall  of  the 
Azazimat  mountains,  with  its  masses  of  naked  rock.  In 
the  vast  confusion  that  covers  the  geography  of  this  region, 
the  most  that  can  be  said,  is,  that  either  view  would  serve 
this  passage.  In  either  case  we  get  a  line  running  from  Akrab 
bini  on  the  east  in  a  westerly  direction.  From  this  south- 
ern boundary  the  Amorite  territories  extended  tf  upwards." 

But  when  ?  Manifestly  not  at  the  time  of  which  ch.  i. 
treats,  cf.  ver.  9-19.  The  statement  refers  to  the  time  be 
fore  the  entrance  of  Israel  into  Canaan,  and  is  probably  in- 
tended to  explain  the  facts  stated  in  vers.  34,  36,  by  remind* 
iug  the  reader  of  the  originally  vast  power  of  the  Amorite 
It  was  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  an  enenry  once  so  power 
ful  and  widely  diffused  should  still  assert  his  strength  ir 
some  parts  of  his  former  domain.     Cf  Bachmann  —  Tr.] 


CO  THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


ness  might  be  practiced.  —  The  same  :  Self-con- 
ceit, avarice,  and  6elf-interest  can  bring  it  about 
that  men  will  unhesitatingly  despise  the  command 
of  God.  When  human  counsels  are  preferred  to 
the  express  word  and  command  of  God,  the  result 
is  that  matters  grow  worse  and  worse. 

FScott  :  The  siu  [of  the  people  in  not  driving 


out  the  Canaanites]  prepared  its  own  punishment, 
and  the  love  of  present  ease  became  the  cause  of 
their  perpetual  disquiet. 

Henry  :  The  same  thing  that  kept  their  fathers 
forty  years  out  of  Canaan,  kept  them  now  out  of 
the  full  possession  of  it,  and  that  was  unbelief.  — 
Te.1 


SECOND  SECTION. 


THE  RELIGIOUS  DEGENERACY  OF  ISRAEL  WHICH  RESULTED  FROM  ITS  DISOBEDIENT  CONDUCT 
WITH  RESPECT  TO  THE  CANAANITES,  AND  THE  8EVERE  DISCIPLINE  WHICH  IT  RENDERED  NECES- 
SARY, AS  EXPLAINING  THE  ALTERNATIONS  OF  APOSTASY  AND  SERVITUDE,  REPENTANCE  AND 
DELIVERANCE,    CHARACTERISTIC    OF    THE    PERIOD   OF   THE   JUDGES. 


A  Messenger  of  Jehovah  charges  Israel  with  disobedience,  and  announces  punishment 
The  people  repent  and  offer  sacrifice. 

Chapter  II.  1-5. 

1  And  an  angel  [messenger]  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  came  up  from  Gilgal  to  Bochim, 
and  said,  I  made  you  to  go  up  J  out  of  Egypt,  and  have  brought  you  unto  the  land 
which  I  sware  unto  your  fathers  ;  and  I  said,  I  will  never  break  my  covenant  with 

2  you.  And  [But]  ye  shall  make  no  league  [covenant]  with  the  inhabitants  of  this 
land  ;  ye  shall  throw  down  2  their  altars :  but  ye  have  not  obeyed  [hearkened  to]  my 

3  voice  :  why  have  ye  done  this?3  Wherefore  [And]  I  also  said,  [in  that  case  —  ;,  e.  m  the 
event  of  disobedience] i  I  will  not  drive  them  out  from  before  you ;  but  they  shall  be  as 

4  thorns  in  your  sides.6  and  their  gods  shall  be  [for]  a  snare  unto  you.  And  it  came  to 
pass,  when  the  angel  [messenger]  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  spake  [had  spoken]  6  these 
words  unto  all  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel,  that  the  people  lifted  up  their  voice,  am" 

5  wept.  And  they  called  the  name  of  that  place  Bochim  [weepers]  :  and  they  sacrificeo. 
there  unto  the  Lord  [Jehovah]. 

TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  1. —  n  /VS.  Kbil:  "  The  use  of  the  imperfect  instead  of  the  perfect  (cf.  ch.  vi.  8)  is  very  singular,  seeing  that 

the  contents  of  the  address,  and  its  continuation  in  the  historical  tense  (KS2S*1  and  Ht2S  l\  require  the  preterite. 
The  imperfect  can  only  be  explained  by  supposing  it  to  be  under  the  retrospective  influence  of  the  immediately  following 
imperfect  consecutive .M  De  Wette  translates,  t(  I  said,  I  will  lead  you  up  out  of  Egypt,  and  brought  you  into  the  laud," 
etc.  This  supposes  that  ^^1"]TDS,  or  some  such  expression,  has  dropped  out  of  the  text,  or  is  to  be  supplied.  This  mode 
of  explaining  the  imperfect  is  favored  (1),  by  the  fact  that  we  seem  to  have  here  a  quotation  from  Ex.  iii.  17;  but  especi- 
ally (2j,  by  the  "^Sl  before  the  last  clause  of  this  verse,  and  the  ^"^ES  D31  of  ver.  3,  which  suggest  that  the  same 
rerb  is  to  be  understood  in  ver.  la.  —  Tr.] 
[2  Ver.  2.  —  ^!|2riri,  from  *f  H3,  to  tear  down,  demolish.  On  the  form,  cf.  Ges.  Gram.  §  47,  Rem.  i.  —  Tr.) 
[8  Ver.  2.  —  More  literally  :  "  What  is  this  that  ye  have  done !  "  t.  c.  How  great  is  this  sin  you  have  committed  !  cf. 
ch.  viii.  1.  —  Tr.) 

[4  Ver.  3.  —  Dr.  BachmanD  interprets  the  words  that  follow  as  a  definite  judgment  on  Israel,  announcing  that  henceforth 
Jehovah  will  not  drive  out  any  of  the  still  remaining  nations,  but  will  leave  them  to  punish  Israel.  It  is  undoubtedly 
true  that  siTnQS  D!H  may  be  translated,  ft  therefore,  now,  I  also  say  ; ''  but  it  is  also  true  that  it  is  more  natural 
here  (with  Bertheau,  Keil,  Cass.)  to  render,  ,:  and  I  also  said."  To  the  citations  of  earlier  divine  utterances  in  vers  1.  '2 
(see  the  Comment.),  the  messenger  of  Jehovah  now  adds  another,  from  Num.  xxxiii.  65,  Josh,  xxiii.  13.  It  is,  moreover,  n 
strong  poiut  against  Bachinanns  view  that  God  does  not  execute  judgment  speedily,  least  of  all  on  Israel  We  can 
hardly  conceive  him  to  shut  the  door  of  hope  on  the  nation  so  soon  after  the  departure  of  the  latest  surviving  contempo- 
raries of  Joshua  as  this  scene  at  Bochim  seems  to  have  occurred,  cf.  the  comparatively  mild  charges  brought  In  the  mes- 
lenger.  as  implied  in  ver.  2,  with  the  heavier  ones  in  ver.  11  ff-  and  ch.  iii.  6.  7.  Besides,  if  we  understand  a  definite  and  Una! 
wntence  to  be  pronounced  here,  w*  must  understand  ch.  ii.  20  f.  as  only  reproducini:  the  same  las  Bachmann  does),  although 


CHAPTER   II.    1-5. 


51 


Isrue  >  apt.stasy  had  become  far  more  pronounced  when  the  first  Judge  arose  than  it  is  now.      It  seems  clear,  therefore 
that  we  must  here  understand  a  warning,  while  the  sentence  itselt  issues  subsequently  (cf.  foot-note  3,  on  p.  62).  — Tr.] 
[o  Ver.  3.  —  Dr.  Cassel  translates :  «  they  shall  be  to  you  for  thorns."   Cf.  the  Commentary.    The  E.  "V.  supplies  "  thorns  ' 

from  Num.  xxxiii.  55 ;  but  it  has  to  change   n^U/   into   DlP^^iS   or   D^^S.—  Tr.] 

[6  Ver.  4.  —  Better  perhaps,  with  De  Wette  :  K  And  it  came  to  pass,  as  the  messenger  of  Jehovah  spake,  etc.,  that  thi 
people,"  etc.    On   3   with  the  infin.  cf.  Ges.  Lex.  a.  3,  B.  5,  b.  —  Tr  ' 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  ) .  And  there  came  a  messenger  of  Je- 
hovah. Israel  had  experienced  the  faithfulness  of 
the  Divine  Spirit  who,  through  Moses,  led  them 
forth  from  Egypt,  and  made  them  a  people.  In 
him,  they  conquered  Canaan,  and  took  possession 
of  a  noble  country.  In  addition  to  this,  they  had 
the  guaranty  of  the  divine  word  (cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  44), 
that  God  would  never  forsake  them  —  that  the 
truth  on  which  He  had  thus  far  built  up  their  lite 
and  nationality,  would  endure.  Reason  enough 
had  been  given  them  to  fulfill  everything  prescribed 
by  Moses,  whether  great  or  small,  difficult  or  pleas- 
ant, whether  it  gave  or  took  away.  They  had 
every  reason  for  being  wholly  with  their  God, 
whether  they  waged  war  or  enjoyed  the  fruits  of 
victory.  Were  they  thus  with  Him  ?  Could  they 
be  thus  with  Him  after  such  proceedings  in  relation 
to  the  inhabitants  of  Canaan  as  ch.  i.  sets  forth  1 
Israel's  strength  consists  in  the  enthusiasm  which 
springs  from  faith  in  the  invisible  God  who  made 
heaven  and  earth,  and  in  obedience  to  his  com- 
mands. If  enthusiasm  fail  and  obedience  be  im- 
paired, Israel  becomes  weak.  The  law  which  it  fol- 
lows is  not  only  its  rule  of  duty,  hut  also  its  bill  of 
rights.  Israel  is  free,  only  by  the  law ;  without  it,  a 
servant.  A  life  springing  from  the  law,  exhibited 
clearly  and  uninterruptedly,  is  the  condition  on 
which  it  enjoys  whatever  is  to  its  advantage.  To 
preserve  and  promote  such  a  life,  was  the  object  of 
the  command,  given  by  Moses,  not  to  enter  into 
any  kind  of  fellowship  with  the  nations  against 
whom  they  were  called  to  contend.  The  toleration 
which  Israel  might  be  inclined  to  exercise,  could 
only  be  the  offspring  of  weakness  in  faith  (Deut. 
vii.  17)  and  of  blind  selfishness.  For  the  sake  of 
its  own  life,  it  was  commanded  not  to  tolerate  idol- 
atry within  its  borders,  even  though  practiced  only 
by  those  of  alien  nations.  For  the  people  are  weak, 
and  the  superstitious  tendency  to  that  which  strikes 
the  senses,  seduces  the  inconstant  heart.  It  can- 
not be  otherwise  than  injurious  when  Israel  ceases 
to  be  entirely  obedient  to  that  word  in  whose  or- 
ganic wisdom  its  history  is  grounded,  and  its  future 

l  Nevertheless,  Keil  also,  in  loc,  has  followed  the  older 
expositors.    [We  subjoin  the  main  points  on  which  Keil  rests 

his  interpretation  :  ,f  n"il"T  T|S^!3  is  not  a  proprietor 
any  other  earthly  ambassador  of  Jehovah,  as  Phinehas  or 
Joshua  (Targ.,  Rabb.,  Stud.,  Berth.,  and  others),  but  the 
Angel  of  Jehovah,  consubstantial  with  God.  In  simple  his- 
torical narrative  no  prophet  is  ever  called  PPi"!^  ™TS  .^2  i 
such  are  designated  S"33  or  S'3.3   ETK.  as  in  ch.  vi. 

■   T  T  •  ' 

8,  or  Cri/S  Il'V.  1  Kgs.  xii.  22,  xiii.  1,  etc.  The  pas- 
sages, Hag.  i.  13  and  Mai.  iii.  1,  cannot  be  adduced  against 
this,  since  there,  in  the  prophetic  style,  the  purely  appella- 
tive significance  of  T^ST'w  is  placed  beyond  all  doubt  by 
the  context.  Moreover,  no  prophet  ever  identifies  himself 
■o  entirely  with  God,  as  is  here  done  by  the  Angel  of  Jeho- 
vah, In  his  address  vers  1-3.  The  prophets  always  distin- 
guish themselves  from  Jehovah  by  this,  that  they  intro- 
duce their  utterances  as  the  word  of  God  by  the  formula 
"  thus  Baith  Jehovah,"  as  is  also  done  by  the  prophet  in  ch. 
rt.  8.  Nor  does  it  conflict  with   the  nature  of 


|  secured.     Ruin  must  result  when,  as  has  been  r** 
lated,  the  people  fails  in  numerous  instances  to  driv 
out  the  heathen  nations,  and  instead  thereof  enter* 
[into  compacts  with  them.     Special  emphasis  was 
I  laid,  in  the  preceding  narrative,  upon  the  fact  that 
, for  the  sake  of  tribute,  Israel  had  tolerated  the 
'  worship  of  the  lewd  Asherah  and  of  the   sun,  in 
!  Apheea,  in  the  Phoenician  cities,  in  Banias,  and  in 
!  Beth-shemesh.     When  the  occupation  of  Canaan 
was  completed  —  a  date  is  not  given  —  the  impres- 
sion produced  by  a  survey  of  the  whole  land  was 
not  such  as  promised  enduring  peace  and  obedience 
to  the  Word  of  God.    The  organs  of  this  word  were 
not  yet  silenced,  however.     When  the  heads  of  Is- 
rael asked  who  should  begin  the  conflict,  the  Word 
of  God  had  answered  through  the  priest ;  and  an- 
cient exegesis  rightly  considered  the  messenger  of 
God  who  now,  at   the  end  of  the  war,  speaks  to 
Israel,  to  be  the  same  priest.     At  the  beginning, 
he  answered  from  the  Spirit  of  God ;  at  the  end,  he 
admonishes  by  an  impulse  of  his  own.     There  he 
encourages  ;  here  he  calls  to  account.   There  "  they 
inquire  of  God ; "  here  also  he  speaks  only  as  the 
"  messenger  of  God."      He  is  designedly  called 
"  messenger  of  God."     Every  word  he  speaks,  God 
has  spoken.     His  words  are  only  reminiscences  out 
of  the  Word  of  God.     His  sermon  is,  as  it  were,  a 
lesson  read  out  of  this  word.     He  speaks  only  like 
a  messenger  who  verbally  repeats  his  commission. 
No  additions  of  his  own  ;  objective  truth  alone,  is 

what  he  presents.  That  is  the  idea  of  the  T[S  .'2, 
the  messenger,  S-y-yf Aos,  according  to  every  explan- 
ation that  has  been  given  of  him.  The  emphasis 
falls  here,  not  on  who  spake,  but  on  ichat  was 
spoken.  God's  word  comes  to  the  people  unasked 
for,  like  the  voice  of  conscience.  From  the  antith 
esis  to  the  opening  verse  of  the  Book,  where  the 
people  asked,  it  is  evident  that  no  angel  of  a  celes- 
tial kind  is  here  thought  of.  Earlier  expositors 
ought  to  have  perceived  this,  if  only  because  it  is 
said  that  the  messenger  — 

Came  up  from  Gilgal  to  Bochim.  Heavenly 
angels  "appear,"  and  do  not  come  from  Gilgal 
particularly.1      The  connection  of  this  statement 

the  Angel  of  Jehovah  that  he  comes  up  from  Gilgal  to  Bo- 
chim. His  appearance  at  Bochim  is  described  as  a  coming 
up  to  Bochim,  with  as  much  propriety  as  in  ch.  vi.  11  it  is 
said  concerning  the  Angel  of  Jehovah,  that  "he  came  and 
sat  down  under  the  terebinth  at  Ophra."  The  only  fea- 
ture peculiar  to  the  present  instance  is  the  coming  up  r(  from 
Gilgal."  This  statement  must  stand  in  intimate  connection 
with  the  mission  of  the  angel  —  must  contain  more  than  a 
mere  notice  of  his  journeying  from  one  place  to  another."  Keil 
then  recalls  the  appearance  to  Joshua,  at  Gilgal.  of  the  an- 
gel who  announced  himself  as  the  "  Captain  of  the  host  of 
Jehovah,"  and  promised  a  successful  issue  to  Hie  siege  of 
Jericho.  "  The  coming  up  from  Gilgal  indicates,  therefore, 
that  the  same  angel  who  at  Gilgal,  with  the  fall  of  Jericho 
delivered  all  Canaan  into  the  hands  of  the  Israelites,  ap- 
peared to  them  again  at  Bochim,  in  order  to  announce  the 
divine  decree  resulting  from  their  disobedience  to  the  com- 
mands of  the  Lord."  With  this  view  Bachmann  and  Words- 
worth also  agree.  It  must  be  admitted,  however,  that  the 
appearance  of  the  Angel  of  Jehovah,  or  indeed  of  any  angel, 
in  the  character  of  a  preacher  before  the  assembled  congre- 
gation of  Israel  is  without  a  parallel  in  sacred  history.  Keil"i. 
supposition  that  he  addressed  the  people  only  tbrouzh  theu* 


52 


THE   BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


with  the  whole  preceding  narrative  is  profound 
md  instructive.  The  history  of  Israel  in  Canaan 
begins  in  Oilgal.  There  (Josh.  iv.  20  ff.)  stood 
the  memorial  which  showed  how  they  had  come 

through  the  Jordan  into  this  land  (03*?^  ^,:?¥t 

\T!?^'7"  v^-  ^he  name  Gilgal  itself  speaks  of  the 
noblest  benefit  bestowed  on  them  —  their  liberation 
from  the  reproach  of  Egypt.  There  the  first  Pass- 
over in  Canaan  had  been  celebrated.  Thence  also 
begin  the  great  deeds  that  are  done  after  the  death 
of  Joshua.  As  now  the  messenger  of  God  comes 
from  Gilgal,  so  at  first  Judah  set  out  from  thence 
to  enter  into  his  possessions.  A  messenger  who 
came  from  Gilgal,  did  by  that  circumstance  alone 
remind  the  people  of  Joshua's  last  words  and  com- 
mands The  memorial  which  was  there  erected 
rendered  the  place  permanently  suggestive  to  Israel 
of  past  events.  From  the  time  that  Joshua's  camp 
was  there,  it  never  ceased  to  be  a  celebrated  spot 
(comp.  1  Sam.  vii.  16)  ;  but  that  on  this  occasion 
the  messenger  comes  from  Gilgal,  has  its  ground 
in  the  nature  of  his  message,  the  history  of  which 
commences  at  Gilgal. 

Vers.  2,  3.  Why  have  ye  done  this  ?  This 
sorrowful  exclamation  is  uttered  by  the  priest  — 
according  to  Jewish  exegesis,  Phinehas,  the  same 
who  spoke  ch.  i.  2  —  after  he  has  exhibited  in  brief 
quotations  from  the  old  divine  instructions,  first, 
what  God  has  done  for  Israel,  and  then  what  Israel 
has  done  in  disregard  of  God.  The  eternal  God 
has  enjoined  it  upon  you,  not  under  any  circum- 
stances to  enter  into  peaceful  compacts  with  the 
idolatrous  tribes  and  their  altars  among  you,  there- 
by authorizing  them  openly  before  your  eyes  to 
manifest  their  depravity  and  practice  their  abomi- 
nations—  what  have  ye  done!  The  exclamation 
is  full  of  sharp  grief;  for  the  consequences  are  in- 
evitable. For  God  said  (Josh,  xxiii.  13) :  "I  will 
not  drive  out  these  nations  from  before  you."  Is- 
rael had  its  tasks  to  perform.  If  it  failed  it  must 
bear  the  consequences.  God  has  indeed  said  (Ex. 
xxiii,  29,  30),  and  Moses  reiterates  it  (Deut.  vii. 
22),  "  By  little  and  little  I  will  drive  out  the  Ca- 
naanite,  lest  the  land  become  desolate."  And  this 
word  received  its  fulfillment  in  the  days  of  Joshua 
and  subsequently.  But  when  Israel  disobeys,  God 
will  not  prosper  its  disobedience.  It  must  then  ex- 
perience that  which  the  messenger  now  with  grief 
and  pain  announces :  Since  Canaanites  remain 
among  you,  who  ought  not  to  remain,  and  whom 
ye  could  have  expelled,  had  ye  been  wholly  with 
your  God  (Deut.  vii.  17  ff.),  they  will  hurt  you, 
though  they  are  conquered.  It  is  not  an  innocent 
thinn  to  suffer  the  presence  of  sin,  and  give  it  equal 
rights. 

They  shall  be  thorns,  and  their  gods  shall 
be  a  snare   unto   you.      The   Hebrew   text   has 

D^")  D^b  :rrn  :  literally,  "  they  shall  be  sides 

unto  you."  ~1?  everywhere  means  "  the  side ;  " 
and  the  explanations  which  make  "  adversaries, 
hostes"  (Vulgate),  "nets"  (Luther),  "torment- 
ors" (Sachs),  out  of  it,  are  without  any  founda- 
tion. Arias  Montanus,  who  gives  in  lateribits,  fol- 
lows therein  the  older  Jewish  expositors ;  but 
neither  does  the  idea  of  "  hurtful  neighbors  "  lie  in 

heads  tr  representatives,  is  against  the  clear  import  of  vers. 
4,  6,  and  not  to  be  justified  by  a  reference  to  Josh.  xxiv.  1, 
2.  Besides,  an  assembly  of  the  heads  and  representatives, 
presents  the  same  difficulty  as  an  assembly  of  all  the  people. 
Angels  appear  only  to  individuals;  to  Israel  as  a  nation  God 
neaks  through  prophets. — Tr] 


the  word.  From  the  fact  that  the  Chalde*  para 
phrast  has  ^iTJJJp,  "  oppressors,"  it  would  indeed 
seem  that  he  read  Ds"!^  i   fot  in  Num.  xxxiii.  55 

he  also  renders  I*1!??!  by  W?'1'!.  The  Septua- 
gint  rendering  irvvoxds  (the  Syriac  version  of  i* 
has  the  singular,  cf.  Kbrdam,  p.  69),  might  seem 
to  indicate  a  similar  reading,  although  o-wexea 
occurs  perhaps  only  twice  for  "T^S  (1  Sam.  xxiii, 
8 ;  2  Sam.  xx.  3).  None  the  less  does  it  appear 
to  me  to  be  against  the  language  and  spirit  of 

Scripture,  to  read  Q,~}^  here.     For  not  only  does 

D,"]2  occur  but  once  in  Scripture  (Lam.  i.  7),  but 
it  is  expressive  of  that  hostility  which  arises  in 
consequence  of  the  state  of  things  here  described. 
Only  after  one  has  fallen  into  the  snare  begins  that 
miserable  condition  in  which  one  is  oppressed  by 
the  enemy,  while  all  power  of  resistance  is  lost. 
The  following  considerations  may  assist  us  to 
arrive  at  the  true  sense  :  Every  sentence,  from  ver. 
1  to  ver.  4,  is  in  all  its  parts  and  words  a  repro- 
duction of  utterances  by  Moses  and  Joshua.  Verse 
1    is   composed  of  expressions  found  as  follows : 

nb?.b\  etc.,  Ex.  in.  17;  ^riMI,  etc.,  Josh.  xxiv. 

8;    Vr-PSIM,    etc.,  Deut.  i.  35  ;    "1DN  rfb,    etc., 

Lev.  xxvi.  44.     Verse  2  likewise :  HfTIDri  sb, 

etc.,   Ex.  xxiii.   32,  Deut.  vii.  2;    DiTniri2TE) 

pShtFI,  Ex.  xxxiv.  13,  Deut.  vii.  5 ;  C^Qt»  Wb, 
Num.  xiv.  22.  The  case  is  similar  with  ver.  3, 
and  it  is  to  be  assumed  that  the  parallel  passages 
may  be  used  to  throw  light  on  the  text.  Now,  as 
the  first  parallel  to  the  expression,  "  and  they  shall 

be  to  you  for  tsiddim  (O^S),"  we  have  the  words 
in  Num.  xxxiii.  55  :  "  and  they  shall  be  to  you 
for  pricks  in  your  eyes  and  thorns  in  your  sides 

(D^TiS  Crrfb)."  Not  for  "sides,"  therefore, 
but  for  "  thorns  in  the  sides  ; "  and  we  can  as  little 
believe  that  the  same  meaning  would  result  if  the 
expression  were  only  "  sides,"  as  we  can  imagine 
the  idea  to  remain  unaltered  if  instead  of  "  pricks 
in  the  eyes,"  one  were  to  say,  "  they  shall  be  to  you 
for  eyes."  The  second  parallel  passage  is  Josh, 
xxiii.  13  :  they  shall  be  to  you  for  "  scourges  in 
your  sides  and  thorns  in  your  eyes."  The  enemies 
are  compared,  not  with  "sides"  and  "eyes,"  but 
with  scourges  and  thorns  by  which  sides  and  eyes 
are  afflicted.  Now  as  our  passage  as  a  whole 
corresponds  entirely  with  those  of  Numbers  and 
Joshua,  save  only  that  it  abridges  and  epitomizes 
them,  the  threat  which  they  contain  appears  here 
also,  and  in  a  similarly  condensed  form.  It  was 
sufficient  to  say,  "  they  shall  be  to  you  for  thorns ; " 

accordingly,  instead  of  S^^  we  are  to  read  C"3!i 
(tsinnim  for  tsiddim),  a  change  as  natural  as  it  is 
easily  accounted  for,  since  both  words  occurred  not 
only  in  each  of  the  other  passages,  but  in  one  of 
them  were  joined  together  in  the  same  clause 
Emendation  in  this  instance  is  more  conservative 
than  retention,  for  it  rests  on  the  internal  organic 
coherence  of  Scripture.1    Tsinnah,  tsinnim,  tseninim, 

1  [Bachmann  is  not  inclined  to  admire  the  "  conservative  " 
character  of  this  emendation.  He  holds  to  the  reading  of 
the  text,  and  finds  in  it  a  free  reference  to  Num.  xxxiii.  66 
and  Josh,  xxiii.  13,  by  virtue  of  which  "  the  nations  them- 

selves  "  —  for,  in  his  view,  the   ^"^^S  S  V   (ver.  3)  refer! 


CHAPTER  n.   1-5. 


5S 


are  thorns,  spina,  pointed  and  stinging.  The  fig- 
ure is  taken  from  rural  life.  Israel,  in  the  con- 
quest, has  acted  like  a  slothful  gardener.  It  has 
not  thoroughly  destroyed  the  thorns  and  thistles  of 
its  fields.  The  consequence  will  be,  that  sowing 
and  planting  and  other  field  labors,  will  soon  be 
rendered  painful  by  the  presence  of  spiteful  thorns. 
What  will  turn  the  Canaanites  into  stingingweeds 
and  snares  for  Israel  1  The  influence  of  habitual 
intercourse.  Familiarity  blunts  aversion,  smooths 
away  contrarieties,  removes  differences,  impairs 
obedience.  It  induces  forgetfulness  of  what  one 
was,  what  one  promised,  and  to  what  conditions 
one  is  subject.  Familiar  intercourse  with  idolaters 
will  weaken  Israel's  faith  in  the  invisible  God  who 
has  said,  "  Thou  shall  not  serve  strange  gods." 

Ver.  4.  When  the  messenger  had  spoken 
these  words,  etc.  It  is  most  likely  that  the  few 
sentences  here  given,  are  but  the  outlines  of  the 
messenger's  address.  But  every  word  rests  on  the 
basis  of  instructions  delivered  by  Moses  and  Joshua. 
The  people  are  sensible  of  the  surpassing  reality 
of  the  blessings  which  they  have  received,  and  for 
that  reason  are  the  more  affected  by  the  thought 
of  the  consequences  which  their  errors  have  brought 
upon  them.  For  the  fulfillment  of  the  law  of  truth 
as  to  its  promises,  guarantees  the  same  as  to  its 
threatenings.  Their  alarm  on  account  of  sin  is 
the  livelier,  the  less  decidedly  active  their  disregard 
of  the  Word  of  God  has  hitherto  been.  They  have 
not  yet  served  the  gods  whose  temples  they  have 
tailed  to  destroy  —  have  not  yet  joined  in  sin  with 
the  nations  whom  they  suffered  to  remain.  It  was 
a  weak  faith,  but  not  yet  full-grown  sin,  by  which 
they  were  led  astray.  God's  messenger  addresses 
"  all  the  sons  of  Israel,"  for  no  tribe  had  formed 
an  exception.  In  greater  or  less  degree,  they  all 
had  committed  the  same  disobedience.  The  whole 
nation  lifted  up  its  voice  and  wept. 

Ver.  5.  And  they  called  the  name  of  the 
place  Bochim  (Weepers).  The  messenger  of  the 
divine  word,  when  he  wished  to  address  Israel, 
must  have  gone  up  to  the  place  where  he  would 
find  them  assembled.  Israel  had  been  commanded, 
as  soon  as  the  Jordan  should  have  been  em--..!. 
and  rest  obtained,  to  assemble  for  feasts  and  sacri- 
fices at  a  sacred  place  (Deut.  xii.  10).  This  order 
applied  not  to  Jerusalem  merely,  but  to  "  the  place 
which  the  Lord  your  God  shall  choose  in  one  of 
the  tribes."  Thither  they  are  to  go  up,  trusting 
in  God  and  dismissing  care.  It  was  only  at  such 
festal  assemblies  that  Israel  could  be  met.  There 
was  the  opportunity  for  preaching  and  admonition. 
The  chosen  place  at  that  time  was  Shiloh.  There 
the  tabernacle  had  been  set  up  (Josh,  xviii.  1 )  ; 
and  there  the  people  assembled  (cf.  Josh.  xxi.  2). 
Thither  they  went  up  from  far  and  near,  to  attend 
festivals  (Judg.  xxi.  19),  and  to  offer  sacrifices  (1 
Sam.  i.  3).  The  whole  progress  of  Joshua  was  a 
going  from  Gilgal  to  Shiloh.  Accordingly,  tin 
messenger  of  God  can  have  found  Israel  at  no 
other  place.  His  discourse  produced  a  general 
outburst  of  weeping  (cf.  1  Sam.  xi.  4).  And  only 
because  it  was  a  weeping  of  penitence  and  shame 
before  God,  did  the  place  where  it  occurred  receive 
and  retain  the  name  Bochim.  It  was  not  a  place 
otherwise  nameless  How  could  the  place  where 
kuch  an  assembly  was  held  be  without  a  name  ! 
And  how  could  it  occur  to  the  people  to  assemble 

rather  to  the  nations  of  the  unconquered  border  districts  (cf. 
ch.  ii.  23,  iii.  1),  than  to  the  scattered  remnants  of  Canaan 
(tea  within  the  conquered  territories  -  -  "  are  described  at 
tides  for  Israel,  t.  t.  as  cramping,  burdensome,  tormenting 
neighbors   '     But  is  it  quite    "conservative  v  to  attach   the 


at  such  a  place  !  In  Shiloh  itself,  some  spot  — 
perhaps  that  where  the  priest  was  accustomed  to 
address  the  people  —  received  the  name  Bochim. 
This  name  served  thenceforth  to  recall  the  teari 
which  were  there  shed.  So  do  they  show  to-day  in 
Jerusalem  the  "Jews'  wailing-place  "  (El  Ebra, 
Ritter,  xvi.  350  [Gage's  Transl.  iv.  50]),  where 
every  Friday  the  Jews  pray  and  lament.  "  And 
they  offered  sacrifices  there. '  After  repentance  ana 
reconciliation  comes  sacrifice. 


HOMTLETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

Faith  and  repentance  come  from  preaching. 
God's  messenger  preaches,  and  Israel  hears.  The 
people  acknowledge  their  sins,  and  weep.  At  that 
time  only  a  divine  admonition  was  needed  to  make 
them  sacrifice  again  to  their  God.  To  fall  is  pos- 
sible even  for  one  who  has  received  so  much  grace 
as  Israel  had  experienced  in  the  lifetime  of  Joshua 
and  after  his  death  ;  but  he  rises  up  as  soon  as  the 
messenger  of  God  touches  his  heart  with  the 
preaching  of  repentance.  A  generation  which 
experienced  divine  miracles,  and  recognized  them 
as  divine,  can  be  brought  to  repentance  by  that 
miracle  which  in  the  proclamation  of  the  word  of 
God  addresses  the  souls  of  men. 

Therefore,  let  not  the  preaching  of  repentance 
fail  to  address  all  the  people.  But  the  preacher 
must  be  (1),  a  messenger  of  God;  and  (2),  must  not 
shun  the  way  from  Gilgal  to  Bochim,  —  must  not 
wait  till  the  people  come  to  him  in  the  place  for 
preaching,  but  must  go  to  them,  until  he  find  a 
Bochim,  a  place  of  tearful  eyes.  But  as  God's 
messenger  he  must  give  heed  that  the  weeping  be 
not  merely  the  result  of  affecting  words,  but  of  a 
penitent  disposition  ;  that  it  be  called  forth,  not  by 
the  flow  of  rhetoric,  but  by  memories  of  the  grace 
of  God  hitherto  experienced  by  the  congregation. 

Starke  :  How  great  concern  God  takes  in  the 
salvation  of  men,  and  especially  in  the  welfare  of 
His  church,  appears  clearly  from  the  fact  that  He 
himself  has  often  reasoned  with  them,  taught  them, 
admonished  and  rebuked  them. 

The  same  :  The  Word  of  God  has  the  power 
of  moving  and  converting  men. 

The  same  :  To  attest  our  repentance  by  tears 
as  well  as  reformation,  is  not  improper ;  nay,  re 
pentance  is  seldom  of  the  right  sort,  if  it  does  not, 
at  least  in  secret,  weep  for  sin. 

Geelach  :  He  reminds  them  of  earlier  com 
mands,  promises  and  threats,  and  shows  them  how 
their  own  transgressions  are  now  about  to  turn 
into  self-inflicted  judgments.  The  people,  however, 
do  not  proceed  beyond  an  unfruitful  sorrow  in  view 
of  this  announcement. 

[Henry:  Many  are  melted  under  the  word, 
that  harden  again  before  they  are  cast  into  a  new 
mould. 

Scott:  If  transgressors  cannot  endure  the  re- 
bukes of  God's  word  and  the  convictions  of  theit 
own  consciences,  how  will  they  be  able  to  stand 
before  the  tribunal  of  the  holy,  heart-searching 
Judge. 

The  same  :  The  worship  of  God  is  in  its  own 
nature  joy,  praise,  and  thanksgiving,  and  oui 
crimes  alone  render  weeping  needful ;  yet,  consider- 
ing what  we  are  and  what  we  have  done,  it  is  much 

idea  of  something  cramping,  etc..  to  the  simple  word  "  side.1 
which  on  no  other  occasion  appears  with  such  horrible  sug- 
gestions of  compression  an""  suffocation  as  Dr.  B.  would  giTl 
it  here  ?  —  Te.] 


54 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


to  be  wished  that  our  religious  assemblies  were 
more  frequently  called  "  Bochim,"  the  place  of  the 
weepers.  "  Blessed  are  they  that  mourn,  for  they 
shall  be  comforted." 

Wordsworth  •  The  Israelites  called  the  place 
Bochim ;  they  named  it  from  their  own  tears. 
They  laid  the  principal  stress  on  their  own  feelings, 
and  on  their  own  outward  demonstrations  of  sor- 
row. But  they  did  not  speak  of  God's  mercies ; 
and  thev  were  not  careful  to  bring  forth  fruits  of 


repentance ;  they  were  a  barren  fig-tree,  having  oul> 
leaves.  Their's  was  a  religion  (such  as  is  too  com 
mon)  of  sentiment  and  emotion;,  not  of  faith  and 
obedience. 

The  same  :  Reproofs  which  produce  only  rea'-s 
—  religious  feelings  without  religious  acts  —  emu 
tions  without  effects  —  leave  the  heart  worse  than 
before.  If  God's  rebukes  are  trifled  with,  His  grace 
is  withdrawn.  —  Tr.] 


An  extract  from  the  Book  of  Joshua  shoiving  when  and  through  what  occasion  the  relij- 

ious  apostasy  of  Israel  began. 

Chapter   II.  6-10. 

6  And  when  [omit :  when]  Joshua  had   [omit :  had]   let  the   people  go,  [and]  the 
children  [sons]  of  Israel  went  every  man  unto  his  inheritance,  to  possess  [to  take 

7  possession  of]  the  land.      And   the  people  served   the    Lord   [Jehovah]   all  the  days 
of  Joshua,  and  all  the  days  of  the  elders  that  outlived  :  Joshua,  who  had  seen  all 

8  the  great  works  of  the   Lord  [Jehovah],  that  he  did  for  Israel.    And  Joshua,  the  sun 
of  Nun,  the  servant  of  the   Lord   [Jehovah],  died,  being  an   hundred  mid  ten   years 

9  old.    And  they  buried  him  in  the  border  [district]  of  his  inheritance  in  Tinnia  h-lieres, 
in  the  mount  [mountains]  of  Ephraim,  on  the  north  side  of  the  hill  [north  of  .Mount] 

10  Gaash.  And  also  all  that  generation  were  gathered  unto  their  father- :  -  and  there 
arose  another  generation  after  diem,  which  knew  not  t  e  Lord  [Jehovah],  nor  yet 
the  works 8  which  he  had  done  for  Israel. 

[1  Ver.  7. — D"*^  ^P"^.rL  to  prolong  one's  days,  usually  means,  ''  to  live  long;"  but  here  the  addition  "aftel 
Joshua  "  shows  that  the  expression  is  not  to  be  taken  in  this  ordinary  acceptation,  but  according  to  the  proper  sense  of 
the  words  :  ;(  they  prolonged  days  (life)  after  Joshua,"  i.  e.  they  survived  him  :  not,  ,r  they  lived  long  after  Joshua,''  cf. 
the  remarks  of  Bachmann  quoted  on  p.  15. —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  10.  —  The  sing.  suf.  in  1\""P3S!,  although  the  verb  is  plural,  arises  from  the  fact  that  the  expression  F)wK3 

ViH^W  /S,  and  others  of  like  import,  are  generally  used  of  individuals  Habit  gets  the  better  of  strict  grammatical 
propriety.  — Tr.] 

[-i  Ver.  10.  —  Dr.  Cassel :  die  Gott  nicht  kannten,  unit  [also]  audi  seine  Titat  nicht  ,■  i.  e.  "  wbo  knew  not  Uod  (Jehovah), 
nor  [consequently],  the  works."  The  explanation  of  this  rendering  is  that  he  takes  (r  knew  "  in  the  sense  of  ''acknowl- 
edge,'' see  below  ;  so  that  the  clause  gives  him   the   following  sense  :   tr  they  acknowledged   not  what  God  had  done  for 

them,  and  of  course  did  not  rightly  value  his  works.  But.  as  Bachmann  observes,  t(  *137"V  frO  conveys  no  reproach, 
but  only  states  the  cause  of  the  ensuing  apostasy.  The  new  generation  did  not  know  the  Lord  and  his  work,  sc.  as  eye 
witnesses  (cf.  ver.  7,  iii-  2)  ;   they  only  knew  from  hearsay."  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  6-8.  The  penitence  of  the  people  at  Bo- 
chim had  shown  that  it  had  not  yet  fallen  from  its 
obedience  to  God,  that  it  was  still  conscious  of  the 
blessings  which  bail  been  bestowed  upon  it.  The 
promise  made  to  Joshua  (Josh.  xxiv.  24)  had  as 
yet  been  kept.  They  still  served  the  Lord.  Their 
position  in  this  respect  was  the  same  as  when  he 
dismissed  the  tribes  to  take  possession  of  their 
several  inheritances.  This  dismission  introduced 
Israel  to  the  new  epoch,  in  which  it  was  no  longer 
guided  by  Moses  or  Joshua.  Hence,  the  insertion 
of  these  sentences,  which  are  also  found  in  Josh. 
xxiv.,  is  entirely  appropriate.  They  describe  the 
arhole  period  in  which  the  people  was  submissive 
to  the  Word  of  God,  although  removed  from  under 
the  direct  guidance  of  Joshua.  The  people  was 
Cihhful  when  left  to  itself  by  Joshua,  faithful  after 


his  death,  faithful  still  in  the  days  of  the  elders  who 
outlived  Joshua.  That  whole  generation,  which 
had  seen  the  mighty  deeds  that  attended  the  con- 
quest of  Canaan,  stood  firm.  Our  passage  says, 
"  for  they  had  seen,"  whereas  Josh.  xxiv.  31  s;ivs, 
"  they  had  known."  "  To  see  "  is  more  definite  than 
"to  know."  The  facts  of  history  may  be  known 
as  the  acts  of  God,  without  being  witnessed  and 
experienced.  But  this  generation  had  stood  in  the 
midst  of  the  events ;  the  movements  of  the  conflict 
and  its  results  were  still  present  in  their  memories 
Whoever  has  felt  the  enthusiasm  inspired  by  such 
victories  and  conquests,  can  never  forget  them. 
The  Scripture  narrators  are  accustomed,  like  the 
chroniclers  of  the  Middle  Ages,  to  repeat  literally 
what  has  already  been  said  elsewhere,  in  cases 
where  modern  writers  content  themselves  with  A 
mere  reference.  While  we  should  have  deemed  it 
sufficient  to  appeal  to  earlier  histories  for  an  account 


CHAPTER    II.    6-10. 


54 


of  the  death  of  Joshua,  the  narrative  before  us  takes 
the  more  accurate  method  of  literal  repetition. 
Iience,  the  interruption  of  the  course  of  thought 
;ommeneed  vers.  1-5,  is  only  apparent.  Vers.  6-10 
explain  the  pious  weeping  of  the  people  which  vers. 
i  and  5  recorded.  Joshua's  death,  age,  and  burial 
are  mentioned,  because  the  writer  wishes  to  indicate 
that  Israel  served  God,  not  only  after  its  dismission 
lty  the  still  living  leader,  but  also  after  his  decease. 
The  less  necessity  there  was  for  the  statements  of 
vers.  8  and  9,  the  more  evident  it  is  that  they  are 
borrowed  from  Josh.  xxir.  And  we  may  congratu- 
late ourselves  that  by  thi  ■  means  the  name  of  the 
place  where  Joshua  was  buried,  has  been  handed 
down  to  us  in  a  second  form. 

Yer.  9.  And  they  buried  fiim  in  Timnath- 
heres,  in  the  mountains  of  Ephraim,  north  of 
Gaash      In   Josh.    xxiv.    30,    the    place   is  called 

Timnath-serah  C"HD  for  DTP).  The  most  rever- 
ential regard  for  the  Masoretic  text  will  not  refuse 
to  acknowledge  many  variations  in  the  names  of 
places,  arising  especially  from  the  transposition  of 

letters  (as  ^30  and  2.-0  Josh.  xix.  29).1  Jew- 
ish tradition,  it  is  true,  explains  them  as  different 
names  borne  by  the  same  place ;  but  the  name 
Cheres  is  that  which,  in  Kefr  Cheres,  preserved  it- 
self in  the  country,  as  remarked  by  Esthor  ha- 
Farchi  (ii.  434)  and  other  travellers  (Carmoly,  pp. 
212,  368,444,  etc.).  Eli  Smith  discovered  the  place, 
April  26,  1843.  A  short  distance  northwest  of 
Bir-Zeit  (already  on  Robinson's  earlier  map,  cf.  the 
later),  near  Wady  Belat,  "there  rose  up  a  gentle 
hill,  which  was  covered  with  the  rains  or  rather 
foundations  of  what  was  once  a  town  of  consider- 
able size."  The  spot  was  still  called  Tibneh  (for 
Timnah,  just  as  the  southern  Timnath  is  at  present 
called  Tibneh).  The  city  lay  to  the  north  of  "a 
much  higher  hill,  on  the  north  side  of  which  (thus 
facing  the  city),  appeared  several  sepulchral  exca- 
vations." -  No  other  place  than  this  can  have  been 
intended  by  the  Jewish  travellers,  who  describe 
several  graves  found  there,  and  identify  them  as 
those  of  Joshua,  his  father,  and  Caleb  (Carmoly,  p. 
387).  The  antiquity  of  the  decorations  of  these 
sepulchres  may  indeed  be  questioned,  but  not  that 
of  the  sepulchres  themselves.  Smith  was  of  opin- 
ion that  hitherto  no  graves  like  these  had  been  dis- 
covered in  Palestine.  Tibneh  lies  on  the  eastern 
side  of  Mount  Ephraim,  the  same  side  on  which, 
farther  south,  Beth-horon  and  Saris  are  found. 
"  Mount  Heres,"  which  not  the  tribe  of  Dan.  but 
only  the  strength  of  Ephraim,  could  render  tribu- 
tary, must  have  lain  near  Saris,  east  of  Aijalon. 
It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the  name  Heres  must 
have  been  borne  by  this  whole  division  of  the  moun- 
tains of  Ephraim;  and  that  the  Timnath  in  which 
Joshua  was  buried,  was  by  the  addition  of  Heres 
distinguished  from  other  places  of  the  same  name. 
In  this  way,  the  peculiar  interest  which  led  Eph- 
raim to  administer  justice  on  Mount  Heres  (cf.  on 
ch.  i.  35)  explains  itself. 

Yer.  10.  And  also  all  that  generation,  etc. 
Time  vanishes.  One  generation  goes,  another 
?omes.  Joshua,  who  had  died  weary  with  years, 
■vas  followed  into  the  grave  by  his  younger  con- 
•emporaries.  The  generation  that  had  borne  arms 
tfith  him,  had  been  buried  in  the  soil  of  the  prom- 
sed  land;  and  another,  younger  generation  lived. 


I  A»      C^C^n     and      CmiT,     CK^S  ,S     and 

T 

wi,  lib.  I.  cap  sx.  torn.  2,  p.  137. 


and  VJlpB?.      Cf.  Bochart,  Hierozo- 


It  had  already  grown  up  in  the  land  which  the 
fathers  had  won.  It  inherited  from  them  only 
possession  and  enjoyment.  It  already  felt  itself  at 
home  in  the  life  of  abundance  to  which  it  was  burn 
It  could  not  be  counted  as  a  reproach  to  them  tha 
they  had  not  seen  the  mighty  works  of  God  in  con- 
nection with  the   conquest   (hence    it  is  not  said 

-"IST  S;) ;  but  in  the  triteness  of  possession  they 

utterly  failed  to  acknowledge  pBHJ  S  '  I  their 
indebtedness  for  it  to  God.  How  Israel  came  into 
the  land,  they  must  indeed  have  known;  but  to 
"  know  Jehovah  "  is  something  higher.  They  did 
not  acknowledge  that  it  was  through  God  that  they 
had  come  thither.  Their  fathers  had  seen  and  it-It 
that  victory  and  freedom  came  to  them  from  the 
Lord.  But  they,  as  they  did  eat,  built  goodly 
houses,  and  dwelt  in  them  (Dent.  viii.  12).  forgat 
God,  and  said  (Dent.  viii.  17)  :  "  Our  power  and 
the  might  of  our  hands  hath  gotten  us  this  wealth." 
Modern  German  history  furnishes  an  instructive 
illustration.  The  generation  which  broke  the  yoke 
of  servitude  imposed  by  Napoleon,  "  felt  their 
God,"  as  E.  M.  Arndt  sang  and  prayed.  The 
succeeding  age  enjoys  the  fruits  and  says  :  "  Our 
5kill  and  arms  have  smitten  him."  The  living 
enthusiasm  of  action  and  strength,  feels  that  its 
source  is  in  the  living  God.  It  looks  upon  itself  as 
the  instrument  of  a  Spirit  who  gives  to  truth  and 
freedom  their  places  in  history.  The  children  want 
the  strength  which  comes  of  faith  in  that  Spirit 
who  in  the  fathers  accomplished  everything  —  and 
want  it  the  more,  the  less  they  have  done.  Every- 
thing foretold  by  Moses  goes  into  fulfillment.  The 
later  Israel  had  forgotten  (Dent.  viii.  14)  what  God 
had  done  for  their  fathers  —  in  Egypt,  in  the  des- 
ert, in  Canaan.  The  phraseology  is  very  sug- 
gestive ;  they  "knew  not  Jehovah,  nor,  conse- 
quently, the  works  which  he  had  done  for  Israel.' 
Among  the  people,  the  one  is  closely  connected 
with  the  other,  as  is  shown  by  what  follows. 

HO.MILETICAL    A.VD    PRACTICAL. 

One  generation  goes  and  another  comes,  but  the 
word  of  lie"!  abides  forever.  It  holds  good  for 
fathers  and  children  ;  it  judges  ancestors  and  de- 
scendants. The  new  Israel  had  not  beheld  the 
deeds  of  Joshua  and  Caleb  ;  but  the  God  in  whose 
spirit  they  were  accomplished,  still  lived.  They 
had  not  witnessed  the  recompense  which  was  vis 
itcd  upon  Adoni-bezek  ;  but  the  Word  which  prom 
ises  reward  and  punishment,  was  still  living.  Israel 
apostatized  not  because  it  had  forgotten,  but  be- 
cause sin  is  ever  forgetful.  When  the  blind  man 
sins,  it  is  not  because  he  does  not  see  the  creation 
which  God  created,  but  because  sin  is  blind  both 
in  those  who  see  and  in  those  who  see  not. 

Therefore,  no  one  can  excuse  himself,  when  he 
falls  away  into  idolatry.  Creation  is  visible  to  all, 
all  have  come  up  out  of  Egypt,  all  enjoy  the  favor 
of  their  God.  Inexperience,  Satanic  art.--  of  temp- 
tation, temperament,  can  explain  many  a  fall ;  yet, 
no  one  falls  save  by  his  own  evil  lusts,  and  all 
wickedness  is  done  before  the  eyes  of  God  (ver. 

Starke  :  Constantly  to  remtmber  and  medi- 
tate on  the  works  of  God  promotes  piety,  causing 

2  Hitter  xvi.  562,  Gage's  Transl.  iv.  246  ;  [.Smith's  "  Visti 
to  Antiparris,"'  in   Bibliotheca    Sacra  for  1843  (published  at 

New  York)  p.  484 Tr.]    On  the  desire  of  the  Bedouins  to 

be  buried  on  mountains,  cf.  Wetzstein,  Hauran,  p.  26- 


56  THE   BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


as  to  fear  God,  to  believe  in  Him,  and  to  serve 
Him. 
Lisoo :   As  long  as  the   remembrance  of  the 


mighty  works  of  God  continued  alive,  so  long  also 
did  active  gratitude,  covenant  faithfulness,  en 
dure. 


The  apostasy  of  Israel  during  the  period  of  the  Judges :  Idolatry  and  its  consequences. 

Chapter   II.    11-15. 

1 1  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  did  evil *  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  and 

12  served  Baalim:  Aid  they  forsook  the  Lord  [Jehovah  the]  God  of  their  fathers, 
which  brought  them  out  of  the  laud  of  Egypt  [Mitsraim],  and  followed  other  gods,  of 
the  gods  of  the  people  [peoples]  that  were  round  about  them,  and  bowed  themselves 

13  unto  them,  and  provoked  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  to  anger.    And  [Yea]  they  forsook  the 

14  Lord  [Jehovah],  and  served  Baal  and  Ashtaroth.  And  the  anger  of  the  Lord 
[Jehovah]  was  hot  [kindled]  against  Israel,  and  he  delivered  them  into  the  hands 
of  spoilers  that  [and  they]  spoiled  them,  and  he  sold  them  [gave  them  up 2]  into  the 
hands  of  their  enemies  round  about,  so  that  they  could  not  any  longer  stand  before 

15  their  enemies.  Whithersoever  [Wheresoever]  8  they  went  out,  the  hand  of  the 
Lord  [Jehovah]  was  against  them  for  evil  [disaster],  as  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  had  said, 
and  as  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  had  sworn  unto  them :  and  they  were  [became]  greatly 
distressed. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 
Ver.  11. —  l?nn  :  lit.  "the  evil."     The  use  of  the  article,  however,  scarcely  warrants  the  stress  laid  ou  it  by  Dr. 

-  T 

'S  Ml  (see  below),  as  3?H("T,  although  most  frequently  used  of  idolatry,  occurs  also  of  6in  in  general  and  of  other  sins 
-  Num.  xxxii.  13 ;  2  Sam.  xii.  9  ;  Ps.  li.  6.     The  art.  is  probably  used  here  as  with  other  words  denoting  abstract  ideas, 
■  .  Qm.  Gt.  §  109,  Rem.  1,  c.  —  Te.] 
[1    Ver.  14.  —  Bachmaitn  :  "  The  giving  up  to  the  enemy  is  represented  as  a  selling.  The  term  of  comparison,  however, 
the  price  received,  but  the  complete  surrender  into  the  stranger's  power."  —  Tr.] 

ft  Ver.  16.  — The  E.  V.  takes  733  =  D'inO"732,    and  ~lt£7S  an  the  accus.  whither,  cf.  Num.  xiii.  27.     So  also 
L  '    t        t  :  '  •-•  -: 

•er  tbeau,  Keil,  and  most  versions  and  commentators.     Dr.  Cassel  takee  "ItJTS  M  accus.  where,  as  in  Gen.  xxxv.  13, 

i    Sam.  vii.  7.     Dr.  Bachmann  thinks  it  safer  "  in  accordance  with  2  Kgs.  xviii.  7  (cf.  Josh.  i.  7,  9),  to  understand  the 

whole  expression  not  of  the  place  of  the  undertaking,   but  of  the  undertaking  itself  (cf.  Deut.  xxviii.  20 :  */23 

na73?FI  "Itl'SI  *[T  nbtrO,  with  ver.  19 :  .  .  .  .  "•""TIN'22  ^Sb?)  :  lit.  "  in  all  what  =  for  what 
they  went  out,"',  e,  (since  the* connection  points  to  matters  of  war)  in  all  undertakings  for  which  they  took  the  field. 
It  is  at  least  safe  to  say  that  2  Kgs.  xviii.  7  requires  this  interpretation  of  the  phrase  in  question,  cf.  Thenius  in  toe.  — 
Ts.] 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  11-13.  And  they  did  the  evil  in  the 
sight  of  Jehovah.  In  what  the  evil  consisted, 
we  are  soon  informed  :  they  served  other  gods,  not 
their  God.  These  other  gods  of  the  nations  round 
about  them,  are  national  gods.  They  severally 
represent  the  morals,  inclinations,  and  aptitudes, 
of  those  nations.  The  heathen  god  is  the  embodi- 
ment of  the  spiritual  life  and  character  of  the  peo- 
ple that  worships  him.     The  God  of  Israel  is  the 


guidance,  but  to  its  own  strength.  Hence  also,  as 
soon  as  Israel  forgets  God  as  the  author  of  its  his- 
tory, it  falls  into  the  service  of  other  gods,  since 
these  are  the  opposite  of  the  absolute  God,  namely, 
the  visible  embodiment  of  the  nation's  own  seif. 
The  God  of  Israel  is  a  God  on  whom  the  people 
feels  itself  dependent ;  the  heathen  deity,  with  its 
material  representation,  is  the  resultant  of  the 
popular  will.  The  very  moment  in  which  the 
impatient  Israel  of  the  desert  forsook  God,  it  wor- 
shipped the  golden  calf,  the  type  of  Egypt.     Now, 


ven-  opposite  of  this.  He  is  the  God  of  the  uni-  in  Canaan  also,  Israel  is  induced  to  forget  God  as 
verse,  inasmuch  as  He  created  heaven  and  earth ;  its  benefactor.  It  seeks  to  remove  the  contrariety 
and  the  God  of  Israel,  inasmuch  as  He  elected  them  which  exists  between  itself  and  the  Canaanites  :  to 
from  among  the  nations  in  order  to  be  a  holy  peo-  cancel  the  dividing-lines  drawn  by  the  law  of  the 
pie  unto  Himself.  The  law  is  the  abstract  repre-  invisible  God.  It  can  have  fellowship  with  the 
rentation  of  that  divine  morality  which  is  charac-  other  nations  only  by  serving  their  gods.  Among 
teristic  of  the  holy  nation,  a*  such.  Israel  forsakes  the  nations  of  antiquity  no  leagues  found  place 
God,  when  it  does  not  follow  this  law.  It  forgets  I  except  on  the  basis  of  community  in  sacred  things  : 
God,  when  it  ascribes  to  itself  that  which  belongs  j  for  in  these  the  national  type  or  character  ex- 
to  Him;  when  it  explains  the  history  of  its  wars  '  pressed  itself.  In  the  Italian  cities,  a  union  foi 
»nd   victories   by   referring   them,   not    to   divine  joint-sacritices  was  called  concilium,  and  formed  the 


CHAPTER  II.   11-15. 


& 


indispensable  prerequisite  to  connubium  and  com- 
meraum.  The  children  of  Israel,  for  the  sake  of 
their  neighbors,  forget  their  God.  To  please  men, 
they  do  "  the  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord."     Evil, 

V~l,  is  the  opposite  of  what  God  wills.     Whatever 

the  laws  forbids,  is  "  evil."  "  Ye  shall  not  wor- 
ship strange  gods,"  is  the  burden  of  the  first,  and 
the  ultimate  ground  of  all,  commandments.  There- 
fore, when  Israel  serves  them  it  does  what  is,  not 

simply  "  evil,"  but  "  the  evil  "  (3^n).  The  trains 
of  thought  of  the  simple  sentences,  are  bound  to- 
gether by  a  profoundly  penetrating  logic.  The 
new  generation  no  longer  knows  the  works  of  God 
in  Israel's  behalf.  Hence  it  longs  for  intercourse 
with  the  nations  round  about.  For  these  have  not 
been  driven  out.  In  order  to  gratify  this  longing, 
it  serves  their  strange  gods.  But  thereby  it  for- 
sakes Jehovah,  and  provokes  Him  to  anger. 

And  they  served  Baalim.  Baal  OS?),  as 
deity,  is  for  the  nation,  what  as  master  he  is  in  the 
house,  and  as  lord  in  the  city.  He  represents  and 
impersonates  the  people's  life  and  energies.  Hence, 
there  is  one  general  Baal,  as  well  as  many  Baalim. 
The  different  cities  and  tribes  had  their  individual 
Baalim,  who  were  not  always  named  after  their 
cities,  but  frequently  from  the  various  characteris- 
tics for  which  they  were  adored.  The  case  is  an- 
alogous to  that  of  Zeus,  who  by  reason  of  his 
various  attributes,  was  variously  named  and  wor- 
shipped in  Greece.  The  Israelites,  as  they  forgot 
their  own  God,  apostatized  to  that  form  of  Baal 
service  which  obtained  in  the  tribe  or  city  in  wmich 
they  happened  to  live,  according  to  the  manifold 
modifications  which  the  service  of  the  idol  assumed. 
Our  passage  reproduces  very  closely  the  words  of 
the  ^losaic  law  (cf.  Deut.  xvii.  2,  3  ;  xxix.  25  (26)), 
except  that  it  substitutes  Baalim  for  elohim  acherim, 
other  gods.  Eluhim  acherim  is  of  universal  compre- 
hensiveness. "  Other  gods  "  being  forbidden,  the 
false  gods  of  all  ages  and  countries,  whatever 
names  they  may  bear,  are  forbidden.  Acher  is 
"  another,  not  in  any  sense  implying  coordina- 
tion, but  as  expressive  of  inferiority,  spuriousness. 
It  is  used  like  erepos,  posterior,  and  the  German 
after  and  aber.  [Aberglaube  [superstition]  is  a  false 
nlaube  [faith],  just  as  elohim  acherim  are  false  gods.1) 
Baalim  is  here  substituted  as  being  the  current 
name  of  the  countr}'  for  the  false  god.  And  in 
tmth  the  very  name  of  Baal,  in  its  literal  significa- 
tion, expresses  the  contrast  between  him  and  the 
absolute  and  true  Elohim,  Jehovah.  For  as  Baal 
(i.  e.  Lord.  Master),  he  is  dependent  on  the  ex- 
istence of  him  whose  Baal  he  is,  just  as  he  is  no 
husband  who  has  not  a  wife  ;  whereas  it  is  the  na- 
ture of  the  absolute  God  to  be  perfectly  free  and 
independent  of  every  extraneous  object.  These 
Baalim  were  the  "  gods  of  the  nations  who  dwelt 
roundabout  them."  Every  word  of  ver.  12  indi- 
cates that  what  now  occurred,  had  been  foretold  by 
Moses  (cf.  Deut.  xxviii.  20;  xxxi.  16;  Lev.  xxii. 
33).  The  chief  passages  which  are  kept  in  view, 
ire  Deut.  vi.  10  ff. ;  xxix.  25  ff.  Ver.  13  begins 
with  the  same  words  as  ver.  12,  "they  forsook 
3od,"  not  to  repeat  but  to  strengthen  the  state- 
Bent.     It  must  astound  the  reader  that  they  have 

1  Of.  my  Abhnndlung  ubtr  Wissenjeh-  und  Akademien,  p. 
ixxvifi. 

2  Compare  Methuastartus  (n~int£7j?1i'"l^),  formed 
ike  M&thubaal,  Methusalem,  Man  of  (belonging  to)  Astarte. 
Compare  jH^Htl^^K,  "  mv  mother  is  Astarte,"  on  the 


forsaken  God  (2!^  has  the  sense  of  our  expres- 
sion "  to  ignore  one,"  "  not  to  notice  him,"  as  one 
lets  a  poor  mac  stand  and  beg  without  noticing 
him),  to  serve  "Baal  and  Ashtaroth."  Israel,  the 
narrator  wishes  to  say,  was  actually  capable  of 
Living  up  its  own  glorious  God,  who  brought  if 
up  out  of  Egypt,  for  the  sake  of  Baal  and  Ash- 
taroth! The  statements  of  vers.  11,  12,  13,  and 
14  form  a  climax;  for  sin  is  not  stationary,  but 
sinks  ever  deeper.  Ver.  1 1  had  said  that  "  they 
served  Baalim.  Ver.  12  intimates  that  this  was 
in  fact  nothing  else  than  that  which  Moses,  in  the 
name  of  God,  had  described  as  the  deepest  and 
most  radical  crime  of  which  the  nation  could  be 
guilty.  Ver.  13  shows  the  blindness  of  Israel  in 
its  deepest  darkness.  The  people  has  forsaken  its 
God  of  truth  and  purity,  for  the  sake  of  Baal  and 
Ashtaroth  !  That  has  come  to  pass  against  which 
Deut.  iv.  19  warned  as  possible  :  "  Lest  thou  lift  up 
thine  eyes  unto  heaven,  and  when  thou  seest  the  sun, 
and  the  moon,  and  the  stars,  all  the  host  of  heuven, 
shouldest  bow  down  to  them  and  serve  them.  "  The 
luminaries  of  the  heavens  are  the  original  symbols 
of  ancient  idolatry.  Baal  answers  to  Zeus,  the  Greek 
Lightgod.  Ashtaroth,  in  like  manner,  corresponds 
to  Hera  (according  to  the  meaning  of  her  name,  a 
Baalah),  the  Star-queen.     Ashtoreth    means  "  the 

star  "  P^P*1?.  Persian  sitareh,  karnp,  star) ;  in  the 
plural  her  name  is  Ashtaroth.  This  plural  ex- 
presses the  Scripture  phrase  "  host  of  heaven,"  in 
one  collective  conception.  As  Elohim  in  its  plural 
form  represents  the  Deity,  so  Baalim  represents 
Baaldom,  and  Ashtaroth  the  shining  night-heavens. 

(Just  as  cives  and  civitas,  Cs  /"S^  and  i~1Ty?> 
are  used  to  express  all  that  is  included  in  the  idea 
of  the  State.)  The  Greek  form  of  Ashtoreth,  it  is 
well  known,  was  Astarte.  Hence,  names  formed 
like  Abdastartus '2  (Servant  of  Astarte),  find  their 
contrast  in  such  as  Obadiah  (Servant  of  Jah), 
formed  in  the  spirit  of  the  Israclitish  people.  As- 
tarte represents  on  the  coast  of  Phoenicia  the  same 
popular  conception,  suggested  by  natural  phenom- 
ena, which  till  a  very  late  period  Asia  Minor 
worshipped  in  the  goddess  of  Ephesus.  The  Greek 
conceptions  of  Hera,  Artemis,  and  Aphrodite  do 
not  so  coalesce  in  her  as  to  prevent  us  from  clearly 
finding  the  common  source.  From  the  instruc- 
tive passages  of  Scripture,  in  which  the  language 
shows  a  relation  of  Astarte  to  the  propagation  of 
flocks  (Deut.  vii.  13;  xxviii.  4),  it  is  evident  that 
as  luminous  night-goddess  she,  like  Hera,  was  a 
patroness  of  corporeal  fertility,  an  Ilithyia,  Lucina, 
Mylitta.  On  account  of  this  idea,  which  is  char- 
acteristic of  both  goddesses,  the  heavenly  Hera 
(Juno  codestis)  coincides  with  Aphrodite  Urania, 
so  that  Hesychius  remarks  concerning  Belthis 
(Baalath),  that  she  may  be  the  one  or  the  other. 
Astarte  was  worshipped  as  Ashtoreth,  not  only  in 
Zidon  (1  Kgs.  xi.  5  ;  2  Kgs.  xxiii.  13),  but  through- 
out Canaan  ;  special  mention  is  made  of  her  temple 
in  Askclon  (1  Sam.  xxxi.  10).  It  is  evidently  this 
temple  of  which  Herodotus  (i.  105)  speaks  as  dedi- 
cated to  Aphrodite  Urania,  and  which,  as  the 
national  sanctuary  of  Askelon,  the  Scythians  de- 
stroyed.    It  was  On  account  of  its  national  charac 

Sidonian  Inscription  of  Eshmunazar.  Rodiger  (Zeitschrift  • 
d.  d.  m.  Ges.,  1865,  p.  656)  regards  it  as  an  abbreviation  for 
mnit'SnCS,  "  maid-servant  of  Astarte."  wherein  he  if 
followed  by  others. 


58 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


ter,  that  the  Philistines  deposited  in  it  the  arrnor 
of  Saul  as  trophies.  They  saw  in  its  goddess  the 
victor  over  the  defeated  enemy,  just  as  at  Ephesus 
the  repulse  of  the  Cimmerians  was  attributed  to 
the  aid  of  Artemis.  Powers  of  resistance  and  de- 
fense were  ascribed  to  all  those  Asiatic  goddesses 
who  presided  over  the  principle  of  fecundity  in 
nature.  Their  weapons  protect  pacific  nature  and 
that  which  she  cherisht*,  against  the  hostility  of 
wild  and  savage  forces.  The  worship  of  the  Ephe- 
sian  goddess  is  founded  and  celebrated  by  Ama- 
zons. Juno,  the  celestial,  is  represented  with  lance 
in  hand.  The  same  conception  is  indicated  by  an- 
cient representations  of  Aphrodite,  in  which  she 
appears  armed  and  prepared  for  battle.  Astarte  is 
at  all  events  considered  favorable  to  her  nation  in 
war,  since  trophies  of  victory  hang  in  her  temple, 
and  the  capital  of  the  terrible  warrior  Og  bears  the 
name  Ashtaroth  (Josh.  ix.  10 ;  xii.  4).  This  King 
Og  of  Bashan  is  regarded  as  a  scion  of  the  mighty 
Rephaim.  These  latter  have  their  seat  at  Ashte- 
roth  Karnaim,  where  they  are  attacked  by  the 
eastern  kings  (Gen.  xiv.  5).  Ashteroth  Karnaim 
points  to  the  horns  of  the  crescent  moon,  by  which 
also  Astarte  of  Askelon  is  indicated  on  the  coins 
of  that  city  (cf.  Stark,  Gaza,  p.  259).  The  armed 
Aphrodite  in  Sparta  is  the  same  with  Helena  or 
Selene,  the  moon-goddess,  —  a  fact  clearly  demon- 
strative of  her  identity  with  Astarte.  Moon  and 
stars,  the  luminaries  of  the  night-sky,  are  blended 
in  Ashtaroth.  She  represents  the  collective  host 
of  heaven.  Before  this  "  host "  Israel  bowed  down 
when  it  forsook  its  "  Lord  of  hosts."  Baal  and 
Ashtaroth  stand  for  the  whole  national  worship  of 
Phoenicia,  over  against  Jehovah,  the  God  of  the 
universe.  They  are  the  representatives  of  their  na- 
tion's prosperity ;  and  it  is  therefore  a  profound 
conception,  which  Epiphanias  says  some  held 
(Hceres.  lv.  cap.  2),  which  makes  Hercules  (Baal) 
to  be  the  father,  and  Ashtaroth  (or  Asteria.  tJjk 
(tol  'Aorepi'ap, )  the  mother,  of  Melchizedek.  Thus 
when  Melchizedek  bowed  himself  before  Abraham 
and  Abraham's  God,  the  national  spirit  of  Canaan 
submitted  itself.  When  Israel  prostrates  itself  be- 
fore such  symbols,  it  cannot  fail  to  provoke  the  an- 
ger of  its  God. 

Ver.  14.  And  the  anger  of  Jehovah  was 
kindled  against  Israel.  A  climax  appears  also 
in  the  expressions  concerning  the  displeasure  of 
God.  First,  that  which  they  do  is  evil  in  his 
sight  (ver.  11);  then,  they  provoke  Him  to  anger 
'ver.  12;  cf.  Deut.  iv.  25;  ix.  18);  finally,  hi: 
anger  is  kindled  (ver.  14;  also  Num.  xxv.  3; 
xxxii.  13). 

And  He  delivered  them  into  the  hands  of  the 
oppressors  [spoilers]  —  and  gave  them  up  into 
the  hands  of  their  enemies.1  Thus  far  the 
phraseology  has  been  literally  quoted  from  Mosaic 
utterances,  except  that  Baal  and  Ashtaroth  were 
substituted  for  sun,  moon,  and  stars.  The  above 
words  occur  here  for  the  first  time.  They  express 
the  historical  consequences  of  Israel's  wrong-doing. 
When  Israel  forsakes  God  and  his  law,  it  loses  the 
basis  of  its  nationality.  With  God  and  God's  law, 
and  through  them,  it  is  a  people;  without  them,  it 
has  neither  law  nor  national  power.  The  gods 
after  whom  they  run,  do  not  at  all  belong  to  them. 
On  the  contrary,  they  are  the  property  of  nations 
"■ho  are  their  enemies.     Israel  left  Egypt  a  crowd 

1  [On  these  words  Bachmann  remarks  :  r'  This  does  not  de- 
*■  1 1  '■■*■  a  twofold  visitation,  either  simultaneous  or  successive  : 
first  spoiling,  then  servitude  (P.  Mart.),  or  roving  robber 
bands  and  regular  hostile  armies  (Schm.) ;  still  less(Cajet.) 
i  threefold  degree  of  calamity  — spoiling,  slavery,  flight  [the 


of  slaves.  It  was  God's  own  revelation  of  Himself 
fulfilling  his  promise  to  the  fathers,  that  made  il 
free.  If  it  give  up  this  revelation,  it  has  no  longer 
a  basis  of  freedom.  Freedom  is  henceforth  impos- 
sible ;  for  by  serving  the  gods  of  other  nations,  it 
dissolves  its  own  national  existence.  Hence,  this 
faithlessness  towards  God,  is  the  worst  folly  against 
itself.  For  the  enemy  who  gave  way  before  Israel's 
God  and  Israel's  enthusiasm,  will  no  longer  spare 
the  conquerors  of  Canaan  when,  like  men  without 
character,  they  kneel  at  strange  altars.  When 
God  who  elected  Israel  is  not  in  the  midst  of  the 
nation  as  its  protector,  it  is  like  the  defenseless, 
hart  which  the  hunter  pursues.  Such  is  the  figure 
which  underlies  the  expression  :  "  and  God  gave 

them  into  the  hands  of  their  C'DC."     The  root 

rrotf,  DDE?,  is  not  found  in  the  Pentateuch,  and 
occurs  here  for  the  first  time.  The  shosim  are  ene- 
mies of  the  property  of  another,  robbers,  plunder- 
ers, —  as  the  hunter  robs  his  game  of  life  and  hap- 
piness. The  word  is  kindred  to  the  Greek  x^fa, 
with  the  same  meaning,  although,  to  be  sure,  only 
the  passive  x^C0^1  ^  m  use*  (It  seems  also  that 
the  Italian  eweiure  and  the  French  chooser  are  to 
be  derived  from  this  word ;  but  cf.  Diez,  Lex.  der 
Rom.  Spr.,  p.  79).  Israel,  having  broken  its  cov 
enant  with  God  for  the  sake  of  men,  was  by  these 
very  men  oppressed.  They  robbed  it  of  goods  and 
freedom.  For  God  had  "  sold  it,"  like  a  person 
who  has  lost  his  freedom.  What  but  servitude 
remained  for  Israel  when  it  no  longer  possessed  the 
power  of  God  '.  It  cannot  stand  before  its  enemies, 
as  was  foretold,  Lev.  xxvi  37,  in  somewhat  differ 
ent  words.  A  people  that  conquered  only  through 
the  contrariety  of  its  spirit  with  that  of  its  enemies, 
must  fall  when  it  ceases  to  cherish  that  spirit.  No 
one  can  have  power  to  succeed,  who  himself  de- 
stroys his  sole  vocation  to  success.  Hence,  Israel 
could  no  more  be  successful  in  anything.  The 
measure  of  its  triumph  with  God,  i?  the  measure 
of  its  misery  without  Him.  Apostasy  from  God  is 
always  like  a  return  to  Egypt  into  bondage  (Deut. 
xxviii.  68). 

Ver.  15.  As  Jehovah  had  said,  and  as  he 
had  sworn  unto  them.  By  applying  to  their 
sin  the  very  words  used  in  the  law,  the  narrator 
has  already  emphasized  the  enduring  truthfulness 
of  the  divine  announcements.  Israel  is  to  experi- 
ence that  everything  threatened  comes  to  pass ; 
and  with  reason,  for  every  promise  also  has  been 
verified.  But  here  he  expresses  himself  still  more 
plainly.  The  hand  of  the  Lord  (Deut.  ii.  15)  was 
against  them  for  evil  (Deut.  xxix.  20),  as  He  "  bad 
sworn  unto  them."  No  sentence  evinces  more 
plainly  how  closely  the  narrator  keeps  to  the  Mo- 
saic writings.  When  God  is  said  to  swear  unto 
Israel,  it  is  almost  always  in  connection  with 
blessings  to  be  bestowed.  Only  in  two  instances 
(Deut.  ii.  14;  cf.  Josh.  v.  6),  the  Lord  is  repre- 
sented as  having  sworn  that  to  those  who  had  not 
obeyed  his  voice,  He  would  not  show  the  land.  In 
these,  therefore,  the  oath  is  confirmatory  of  threat- 
ened punishment.  The  double  form  of  expression 
also,  that  God  spake  and  swore,  is  prefigured 
Deut.  xxix.  12  (13). 

And  they  became  greatly  distressed,  "'?*]• 
Deut.  xxviii.  50-52  describes  the  plunderers,  who 

latter  indicated  by  f  they  were  no  longer  able  to  stand  before 
their  enemies  '  —  Tr.]  ;   but  God  in  abandoning  the  people 
to   the   resistless  violence  of  their   hostile   neighbors,   doel 
thereby  deliver  them  into  the  hands   of  the  spoilers."  - 
Ta] 


CHAPTER   II.    16-23. 


59 


•hall  rob  them  of  their  cattle  and  their  harvests. 
"  Thou    shah    be   distressed   in    all    thy  gates " 

(17  ~'?D?)i  is  twice  repeated  in  ver.  52.  The 
narrator  presupposes  intimate  acquaintance  with 
the  ancient  writings,  and  therefore  cites  only  their 
salient  points. 

HOMILETICAL   AND    PRACTICAL. 

After  the  judgment  of  the  word  comes  the  judg- 
ment of  the  6word.  He  who  ceases  to  remember 
the  works  of  God,  ceases  also  to  enjoy  the  power 
of  God.  1'or  him  who  shuts  his  eyes,  the  sun 
affords  no  light.  Men  are  judged  by  the  truth 
which  they  despise,  and  betrayed  by  the  sin  which 
they  love.  Israel  can  no  longer  withstand  the 
nations  over  whom  it  formerly  triumphed,  because 
it  courts  their  idols  and  leaves  its  own  God. 

Thus  men  suffer  through  the  passions  which 
they  entertain.     They  are  plundered,  when  instead 


of  God,  they  serve  Baal-Mammon.  The  judg 
raent  of  the  word  which  they  forsake,  is  confirmed 
Men  lose  the  freedom  of  the  children  of  God,  when 
(1)  they  are  no  longer  grateful  to  God;  conse- 
quently, (2)  remember  Him  no  more;  hence,  (3) 
attend  no  longer  to  the  preaching  of  repentance ; 
and  despite  of  it,  (4)  serve  idols. 

Starke  :  He  who  engages  in  another  wor>hi]>, 
forsakes  the  true  God,  and  apostatizes  from  Him. 
But  woe  to  the  man  who  does  this:  for  he  brings 
himself  into  endless  trouble.  The  same  :  God  is 
as  true  to  his  threats  as  to  his  promises.  Lisco  ■ 
The  people  whom  trouble  and  bondage  had  brought 
to  a  consciousness  of  their  guilt,  sank  again  into 
idolatry  through  levity  and  commerce  with  heathen, 
and  thus  new  chastisements  became  necessary. 
Gerlach  :  The  judgment  affords  a  deep  glance 
into  God's  government  of  the  world,  showing  how 
He  makes  all  sin  subservient  to  his  own  power,  by 
punishing  it  with  the  very  evils  that  arise  from 
it. 


The  interposition  of  God  in  Israel's  behalf  by  the  appointment  of  Judges.     Deliverance 
and  the  death  of  the  Deliverer  the  occasion  of  renewed  apostasy. 

Chapter  II.  16-23. 


16  Nevertheless   [And]   the   Lord   [Jehovah]   raised  up  judges,  which  [and  they] 

17  delivered  them  out  of  the  hand  of  those  that  spoiled  them.  And  yet  they  would  not 
[But  neither  did  they]  hearken  unto  their  judges,  but1  they  went  a  whoring*  after 
other  [false]  gods,  and  bowed  themselves  unto  them :  they  turned  quickly b  out  of 
the  way '  which  their  fathers  walked  in,  obeying  8  the  commandments  of  the  Lord 

18  [Jehovah] ;  but  they  did  not  so.  And  when  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  raised  them  up 
judges,  then  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  was  with  the  judge,  and  delivered  them  out  of  the 
hand  of  their  enemies  all  the  days  of  the  judge  :  (for  it  repented  the  Lord  [Jehovah] 
because  of  their  groanings  [waitings  c]   by  reason  of  them  that  oppressed  d  them  and 

19  vexed  [persecuted6]  4  them.)  And  [But]  it  came  to  pass,  when  the  judge  was  dead, 
that  they  returned  [turned  back],  and  corrupted  themselves  6  more  than  their  fathers, 
in  following  other  [raise]  gods  to  serve  them,  and  to  bow  down  unto  tliem ;  they 
ceased  not   from  6  their  own   [omit :  own]    [evil]   doings/  nor  from   their  stubborn 

20  way.g  And  the  anger  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  was  hot  [kindled]  against  Israel ;  and 
he  said,  Because  that  this  people   hath   transgressed  my  covenant11  which  I  com- 

21  manded  their  fathers,  and  have  not  hearkened  unto  my  voice  ;  I  also  will  not  hence- 
forth [will  not  go  on  to]  drive  out  any  [a  man]  from  before  them  of  the  nations 

22  which  Joshua  left  when  he  died  :  that  through  them  I  may  prove  [in  order  by  them 
to  prove  ']  7  Israel,  whether  they  will  keep  the  way  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  to  walk 

23  therein,  as  their  fathers  did  keep  it,  or  not.  Therefore  [And]  the  Lord  [Jehovah] 
left  those  [these]  nations  [at  rest  k],  without  driving  them  out  hastily  [so  that  they 
should  not  be  speedily  driven  out],  neither  delivered  he  them  [and  delivered  them 
not]  into  the  hand  of  Joshua. 


»  V«r.  17.  —  ?I3T   *3,  etc.,  cf.  Dent.  mi.  16. 

»  Ver.  17.  —  "lnQ  TID,  cf.  Ex.  xxxii.  8  ;  Deut.  is.  12. 

e  Ver  18.  —  Di~lpS3,  from  HS3,  cf.  Ex.  ii.  24,  vi.  6. 

d  Ter.  18.—  ^nb,  cf.  Ex.  in.  9. 

•  Ver.  18.  —  pni  appears  here  for  the  first  time.     Cf. 
the  Greek  $i.u>ku. 


f  Ver.  19.  —  Cf.  Deut.  xxviii.  20. 

g  Ver.  19.—    ntTi?,  with   reference  tc    Ex.    xxxiil.  ( 

T  'T7 

etc.,  where  already  Israel  is  called  P]H  Vnt^p. 
n  Ver.  20.  —  Cf.  Josh.  vii.  11. 
i  Ver.  22.  —  Cf.   Ex.  xvi.  4  ;  xx.  20 ;  Deut.  Tiii.  2.   10 

xiii.  4  (3). 
k  Ver.  23  —  Cf.  Num.  xxxii.  15. 


30 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


TEXTUAL  AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  17.  —  Dr.  Cassel  has  denn,"  for."'    f*  But  "  is  better.    On  ^3  after  a  negative,  cf.  Ges.  Gr.  p.  272,  at  tup. —  Ti- 
ps Ver.  17.  —  That  is,  as  often  as  a  Judge   had  succeeded   in  bringing  them  back   to   the  way  of  their  fathers,  the! 

quickly  left  it  again.     So  Bachmann.  —  Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  17.  —  3?Qti?7  :   "  in  that  they  obeyed."     On  this  less  regular,  but  by  no  means  rare  (cf.  ver.  19,  Ps.  lxxviii 

18  ;  1  Sam.  xx.  20  ;  etc.)  use  of  the  infin.  with  7,  cf.  Ew.  280  d.  —  Tr.J 

[4  Ver.  18.  —  pFI^,  only  here  and  in  Joel  ii.  8.  If  the  clause  were  rendered  :  "  before  those  that  crowded  (t^riv, 
cf.  on  ch.  i.  31)  and  pressed  upon  them."  its  metaphorical  character  would  be  preserved  as  nearly  as  possible.  —  Tr.] 

[C  Ver.  19.  —  The  E.  V.  is  correct  as  to  sense  ;  but  the  Hebrew  phrase,  filled  out,  would  be,  (f  they  corrupted  their 
way,"  cf.  Gen.  vi.  12.  —  Tr.] 

[6  Ver.  19.  —  }Q  ^w^Sn  N  /  :  lit.  tr  they  caused  not  (sc.  their  conduct,  course  of  action)  to  fall  away  from  their 
(evil)  deeds."  —  Tr.] 

[7  Ver.  22. —  j"T1l3D  ^3?£2/«  Grammatically  this  infin.  of  design  may  be  connected  either  with  ?]*D^M  fcO, 
ver.  21,  ~)£5SS1,  ver.  20,  or  3T  *\  The  first  construction  (adopted  by  E.  V.)  is  inadmissible,  because,  1.  It  suppose* 
that  Jehovah  himself  continues  to  speak  in  ver.  22,  in  which  case  we  should  expect  *3TT"jHSI,    nrst  PeT--  rather  than 

mrP  Tj'"!'!!'"'"^^  2*  It  supposes  that  the  purpose  to  prove  Israel  is  now  first  formed,  whereas  it  is  clear  from  ch. 
iii  1,  4,  that  it  was  already  operative  in  the  time  of  Joshua.  This  objection  is  also  fatal  to  the  construction  with 
""ISNS1,  adopted  by  Keil.  (That  Dr.  Cassel  adopts  one  of  these  two  appears  from  the  fact  that  he  reads:  ff  whether 
they  will  (instead  of  would,  me  farther  on)  keep  the  way  of  Jehovah,"  but  which  of  the  two  is  not  clear.)  It  remains, 
therefore,  to  connect  with  273?,  against  which  there  is  no  objection,  either  grammatical  or  logical.  "  For  in  such 
loosely  added  infinitives  of  design,  in  which  the  subject  is  not  definitely  determined,  the  person  of  the  infin.  goes  back 
to  the  preceding  principal  word  only  when  no  other  relation  is  more  obvious,  see  Ew.  337  b  (cf.  Ex.  ix.  16).  But  that 
here,  as  in  the  perfectly  analogous  parallel  passage,  ch.  iii.  4,  the  design  expressed  by  the  infin.  is  not  Joshua's  nor  that 
of  the  nations,  but  Jehovah's,  is  self-evident,  and  is  besides  expressly  declared  in  ver.  23  and  ch.  iii.  1.  So  rightly  LXX. 
It.  Pesk.  At.  Aug.  (ques.  17),  Ser.  Stud,  and  many  others  "  (Bachinaoo).  The  connection  from  ver.  21  onward  is  there- 
fore as  follows :  In  ver.  21  Jehovah  is  represented  (cf.  foot-note  3  on  p.  62)  as  saying,  "  I  will  not  go  on  to  drive  out  the 
nations  which  Joshua  left  when  he  died."     To  this  the  author  of  the  Book  himself  adds  the  purpose  for  which  they  were 

left,  namely,    to   prove   Israel,  whether   they  would   (not,  will)  keep  the   way    t  tTH"-T"iHS)  °^  Jehovah  to  walk  therein 

(C^,  plur.  "  in  them,"  constr.  ad  KfUUfft,  the  way  of  Jehovah  cousisting  of  the  TTirP  HiS,  Deut.  viii.  2.  —  Keil), 
as  their  fathers  kept  it,  or  not.  (r  And  so,"  he  continues,  i,  e.  in  consequence  of  this  purpose,  K  Jehovah  (not  merely 
Joshua)  left  these  nations  (rwS!""T,  these,  pointing  forward  to  ch.  iii.  1  ff.,  where  they  are  enumerated,)  at  rest,  in  order 
that  they  should  not  speedily  (for  that  would  have  been  inconsistent  with  the  design  of  proving  Israel  by  them,  but  yet 
ultimately)  be  driven  out,  and  did  not  give  them  into  the  hand  of  Joshua."  But  the  tr  not  speedily  "  of  Joshua's  time 
had  by  Israel's  faithless  apostasy  been  changed  into  n  never."  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

The  first  two  chapters  indicate,  by  way  of  intro- 
duction, the  laws  of  historical  cause  and  effect 
whose  operation  explains  the  occurrences  about  to 
be  related  in  the  succeeding  pages.  They  are  de- 
signed to  give  information  concerning  that  most 
important  of  all  subjects  in  Israel,  —  the  relation  of 
the  will  of  God  to  his  chosen  people.  Since  pros- 
perity and  calamity  were  both  referred  to  God,  it 
was  necessary  to  explain  the  moral  grounds  of  the 
same  in  the  favor  or  wrath  of  God.  It  was  most 
important,  in  view  of  the  peculiar  histories  which 
were  to  be  narrated,  that  the  doubts  which  might 
be  raised  against  the  doctrine  of  God's  all-power- 
ful and  world-controlling  direction,  should  be  ob- 
viated. The  connection  between  the  national  for- 
tunes, as  about  to  be  related,  and  the  declarations 
of  the  Mosaic  law,  was  to  be  pointed  out.  The 
reader  was  to  be  informed  why  the  purposes  of  God 
concerning  the  glory  of  Israel  in  Canaan,  as  un- 
folded to  Moses,  had  been  so  imperfectly  fulfilled. 
In  ch.  i.  a  historical  survey  of  the  conquests  of  the 
tribes  had  been  given,  in  order  in  connection  there- 
Irith  to  state  how  little  heed  had  been  given  to  the 
behest  of  the  law  to  expel  the  nations.  In  that 
lisobedience  the  germ  of  all  subsequent  misfor- 
tunes was  contained.  For  by  mingling  with  the 
leathen  nations,  the  chosen  people  fell  into  sin. 
With  Israel  to  fall  from  God  was  actually  to  fall 


back  into  bondage.  In  their  distress  and  anguish, 
God  (vers.  15  and  18)  mercifully  heard  their  crying, 
as  he  had  heard  it  in  Egypt  (Ex.  ii.  24;  vi.  5) 
Now,  as  then.  He  raised  them  up  heroes,  whe 
through  his  might  smote  the  enemy,  and  delivered 
the  people  from  both  internal  and  external  bondage 
(ver.  16).  This,  however,  did  not  remove  the  evil  in 
its  germ.  Since  the  judgeship  was  not  hereditary, 
the  death  of  each  individual  Judge  brought  back  the 
same  state  of  things  which  followed  the  departure 
of  Joshua  and  his  contemporaries.  The  nation 
continually  fell  back  into  its  old  sin  (vers.  18,  19). 
The  history  of  events  under  the  Judges,  is  the  his- 
tory of  ever  recurring  exhibitions  of  divine  com- 
passion and  human  weakness.  Hence,  the  great 
question  in  Israel  must  be  one  inquiring  into  the 
cause  of  these  relations.  If,  the  people  might  say, 
present  relations  owed  their  existence  to  the  temp- 
tations occasioned  by  the  remaining  Canaanites, 
he  on  whom  the  first  blame  for  not  expelling  them 
must  fall,  would  be  none  other  than  Joshua  !  Why 
did  not  that  hero  of  God  drive  them  all  out  of  the 
land  !  Why  did  he  not  secure  the  whole  land,  in  alt 
its  extended  boundaries,  for  a  possession  to  Israel? 
If  only  sea  and  desert  had  bounded  their  territories, 
Israel  would  have  had  no  temptation  to  meddle 
with  the  superstitions  of  neighbors.  Left  to  them- 
selves, they  would  have  thought  of  nothing  else  than 
to  serve  their  God.  To  this  vers.  21  ff.  reply  :  God  is 
certainly  the  Helner  and  Guide  of  Israel,  its  Libera 


CHAPTER   II.    11-23. 


61 


tor  and  Conqueror  ;  but  not  to  serve  the  sinfulness 
and  sloth  of  Israel.  The  Spirit  of  God  is  with  Israel, 
when  the  freewill  of  Israel  chooses  obedience  to  God. 
But  the  freedom  of  this  choice  demonstrates  itself 
only  under  temptation.  Abraham  became  Father  of 
the  Faithful  because,  though  tempted  (Gen.  xxii 


men  and  citizens.  Originally,  Moses,  deeming  i" 
his  duty  to  exercise  all  judicial  functions  himself, 
was  the  only  judge  in  Israel  (Ex.  xviii.  16).  Bui 
when  this  proved  impracticable,  he  committed  thi 
lesser  causes  to  trustworthy  men  from  among  the 
people,  just  as  at  the  outset  the  Spartan  ephor; 


),  he  nevertheless  stood  firm.     Fidelity  and  faith   had  authority  only  in  unimportant  matters.    These 
approve  themselves  only  in  resistance  to  seductive   he  charged  (Ex.  xviii.  21  ;  Deut.  i.  16)  to  "judge 


influences.  God  in  his  omnipotence  might  no  doubt 
remove  every  temptation  from  the  path  of  believ- 
ers ;  but  He  would  not  thereby  bestow  a  boon  on 
man.  The  opportunity  for  sinning  would  indeed 
be  rendered  difficult ;  biit  the  evidence  of  victorious 
conflict  with  sin  would  be  made  impossible.  Had 
God  suffered  Joshua  to  remove  out  of  the  way  all 
nations  who  might  tempt  Israel,  the  people's  in- 
ward sinful  inclinations  would  have  been  no  less, 
it  would  have  cherished  no  greater  love  for  God  its 
benefactor,  it  would  have  forgotten  that  He  was  its 
liberator  (ch.  ii.  10) ;  and  the  faith,  the  fidelity,  the 
enthusiasm,  which  come  to  light  amid  the  assaults 
of  temptation,  would  have  had  no  opportunity  to 
win  the  approval  of  God  or  to  secure  the  imparta- 
tion  of  his  strength.  Unfaithfulness,  to  be  sure, 
must  suffer  for  its  sins ;  but  faithfulness  is  the 
mother  of  heroes.  The  Book  of  Judges  tells  of  the 
trials  by  which  God  suffered  Israel  to  be  tried 
through  the  Canaanites,  of  the  punishments  which 
they  endured  whenever  they  tailed  to  stand  the 
tests,  —  but  also  of  the  heroes  whom  God  raised 
up  because  they  preserved  some  faith  in  Him.  The 
closing  verses  do  not  therefore  contradict  the  open- 
ing of  the  chapter.  The  pious  elders  weep  when 
from  the  words  of  the  "  messenger  from  Gilgal  " 
they  perceive  the  temptation.  The  unfaithful 
younger  generation  must  suffer  the  penalty  be- 
cause they  yielded  to  the  seduction.  Joshua  would 
doubtless' have  expelled  all  the  nations;  but  God 
did  not  permit  it.  He  died ;  but  in  Ins  place  God 
raised  up  other  heroes,  who  liberated  Israel  when, 
in  distress,  it  breathed  penitential  sighs.  Such,  in 
outline,  are  the  author's  thoughts  as  to  the  causes 
which  underlie  his  history.  He  uses  them  to  intro- 
duce his  narrative,  and  in  the  various  catastrophes 
of  the  history  constantly  refers  to  them. 

Vers.  16-19.  And  Jehovah  raised  them  up 
Judges,  n't2"tl\  Shophetim.  This  word  occurs 
here  for  the  first  time  in  the  special  sense  which  it 
has  in  this  period  of  Israelitish  history,  and  which 
it  does  not  appear  to  have  had  previously.  t2St£? 
is  to  judge,  to  decide  and  to  proceed  according  to 
the  decision,  in  disputes  between   fellow-country- 

1  A  similarly  formed  title  is  that  of  Bilonnier,  given  by 
the  French  to  the  chief  of  the  barristers,  and  yet  very  dif- 
ferent from  the  mediaeval  btutonerius. 

2  [Dr.  Cassel's  words  are :  Gesetz  und  Recht.  For  the 
tatter  term,  as  technically  used,  the  English  language  has 
no  equivalent.     It  is  Right  as  determined  by  law.  —  Tr.] 

3  [Dr.  Bachmann  (with  many  others)  reaches  an  entirely 
different  definition  of  the  "Judges."  The  Judge  as  such, 
he  contends,  acts  in  an  external  direction,  in  behalf  of,  Dot 
on,  the  people.  A  Judge,  in  the  special  sense  of  our  Book,  is 
first  of  all  a  Deliverer,  a  Savior.  He  may,  or  he  may  not, 
jxerr.ise  judicial  functions,  properly  speaking,  but  he  is 
Judge  because  he  delivers.  This  view  he  supports  by  an 
extended  review  of  the  urns  loquendi  of  the  word,  and  espe- 
cially by  insisting  that  ch.  ii.  16,  18  admits  of  no  other 
definition.  "Why,"  he  asks,  quoting  Dr.  Cassel,  "  if  a 
Judge  is  first  of  all  a  restorer  of  law  and  right,  does  not  ch. 
i.  11-19,  which  gives  such  prominence  to  the  fact  that  the 
"breaking  of  the  divine  law  is  the  cause  of  all  the  hostile 
oppressions  endured  by  Israel,  lay  similar  stress,  when  it 
lomes  to  speak  of  the  Shophetim,  on  the  restoration  of  the 
•lilthority  of  law,  but,  on  the  contrary,  speaks  of  the  deliv- 


■hteously  between  every  man  and  his  brother.' 
For  the  future,  he  enjoins  the  appointment  of  judges 
in  every  city  (Deut.  xvi.  18).  Their  jurisdiction 
extends  to  cases  of  life  and  death,  to  matters  of  idol- 
atry as  all  other  causes  (Deut.  xvii.  1-12  ;  xxv.  2) ; 
and  although  the  words  are  "  thou  shalt  make  thee 
judges,"  the  judges  are  nevertheless  clothed  with 
such  authority  as  renders  their  decisions  completely 
and  finally  valid.  Whoever  resists  them,  must  die 
(Deut.  xvii.  12).  The  emblem  of  this  authority,  in 
Israel  as  elsewhere,  was  the  staff  or  rod,  as  we  see 

it  carried  by  Moses.    The  root  t2Ct£7  is  therefore  to 

be  connected   with  tt^tS,  staff  (SKTrmpov,   scipio. 

tOv^'  is  a  staff-man,  a  judge.  In  the  Homeric 
poems,  when  the  elders  are  to  sit  in  judgment,  the 
heralds  reach  them  their  staves  (11.  xviii.  506) ; 
"but  now  (says  Achilles,  II.  i.  237),  the  judges 
carry  in  their  hands  the  staff." '  Judicial  author- 
ity is  the  chief  attribute  of  the  royal  dignity. 
Hence,  God,  the  highest  king,  is  also  "  the  Judge 
of  all  the  earth"  (Gen.  xviii.  25).  He  judges 
concerning  right  and  wrong,  and  makes  his  awards 
accordingly.  When  law  and  sin  had  ceased  to  be 
distinguished  in  Israel,  compassion  induced  Him  to 
appoint  judges  again.  If  these  are  gifted  with 
heroic  qualities,  to  vanquish  the  oppressors  of 
Israel,  it  is  nevertheless  not  this  heroism  that 
forms  their  principal  characteristic.  That  consists 
in  "judging."  They  restore,  as  was  foreseen, 
Deut.  xvii.  7,  12,  the  authority  of  law.  They 
enforce  the  penalties  of  law  against  the  sin  of  dis- 
obedience towards  God.  It  is  the  spirit  of  this 
law  living  in  them,  that  makes  them  strong.  The 
normal  condition  of  Israel  is  not  one  of  victory 

simply ;  it  is  a  condition  in  which  ESpM  ~fl 
law  and  right,-  are  kept.  For  this  reason,  God 
raises  up  Shophetim,  judges,  not  princes  (nesiim, 
sarim).  The  title  sets  forth  both  their  work  and 
the  occasion  of  their  appointment.  Israel  is  free 
and  powerful  when  its  law  is  observed  throughout 
the  land.3  Henceforth,  (as  appears  from  Deut. 
xvii.  14,)  except  shophetim,  only  kings,  melakim, 
can  rule  in  Israel.     The  difference  between  them 

erance  of  the  people  from  its  oppressors  ?  "  To  which  it 
were  enough  to  reply,  first,  that  ver.  16  intends  only  to  show 
how  Israel  was  delivered  from  the  previously  mentionec 
consequences  of  its  lawless  condition,  not  how  it  was  res- 
cued from  the  lawless  condition  itself ;  and,  secondly,  that 
vers.  18,  19  clearly  imply,  that  while  military  activity  may 
(and  from  the  nature  of  the  case  usually  did)  occupy  a  part 
of  the  Judge's  career,  efforts,  more  or  less  successful,  to 
restore  the  supremacy  of  the  divine  law  within  the  nation 
engage  the  whole.  Hence,  the  Deliverer  was  rightly  called 
Shophet,  whereas  in  his  military  character  he  would  have 

been  more  properly  called  y^tl'IB,  cf.  ch.  iii.  9.  Dr 
Bachmann,  it  is  true,  explains  the  title  Judge  (as  derived  from 
the  second  of  the  three  meanings  of  tSC^1)  *■  t0  Jua8e  i 
2.  to  save,  namely,  by  affording  justice  ;  3-  to  rule)  by  the 
fact  that  the  0  T.  views  the  assistance  sent  by  Jehovah  tc 
his  oppressed  people  as  an  act  of  retributive  justice  towards 
both  oppressed  and  oppressor,  cf.  Gen.  xv.  14  ;  Ex.  vi.  6, 
vii.  4 ;  but  in  such  cases  Jehovah,  and  not  the  human 
organ  through  whom  fle  acts,  is  the  Judge.  —  Tr.1 


62 


THE   BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


ties  chiefly  in  the  hereditariness  of  the  royal  office 
—  a  difference,  it  is  true,  of  great  significance  in 
Israel,  and  closely  related  to  the  national  destiny. 
The  Judge  has  only  a  personal  commission.  His 
work  is  to  re-inspire  Israel  with  divine  enthusiasm, 
and  thus  to  make  it  victorious.  He  restores  things 
to  the  condition  in  which  they  were  on  the  death 
of  Joshua.  No  successor  were  necessary,  if  with- 
out a  judge,  the  nation  itself  maintained  the  law, 
and  resisted  temptation.  Israel  has  enough  in  its 
divinelv-given  law.  Rallying  about  this  and  the 
priesthood,  it  could  be  free ;  for  God  is  its  King. 
But  it  is  weak.  The  Judge  is  scarcely  dead,  before 
the  authority  of  law  is  shaken.  Unity  is  lost,  and 
the  enemv  takes  advantage  of  the  masterless  dis- 
order. Therefore,  Judges,  raised  up  by  God,  and 
girded  with  fresh  strength,  succeed  each  other,  — 
vigorous  rulers,  full  of  personal  energy,  but  called 
to  exercise  judgment  only  in  the  Spirit  of  God.  It 
has  been  customary,  in  speaking  of  the  Punic 
suffetes,  to  compare  them  with  the  Israelitish  sho- 
phefhiu  And  it  is  really  more  correct  to  regard  the 
suffetes  as  consules  than  as  kings.  Among  the 
Phoenicians  also  the  idea  of  king  included  that  of 
hereditariness.1  The  suffetes  were  an  elected  mag- 
istracy, whose  name,  like  that  of  the  Judges,  was 
doubtless  derived  from  the  fact  that  they  also  con- 
stituted the  highest  judicial  authority.  They  sat 
in  judgment  (ad  jus  dicendam)  when  the  designs 
of  Aristo  came  to  light  {Livy,  xxxiv.  61).  It  is, 
in  general,  by  no  means  uncommon  for  the  magis- 
tracy of  a  city  (summits  rnagistratus),  as  iu  the  Span- 
ish Gades  (Livy,  xxviii.  37),  to  be  styled  Judges, 
i.  e.  suffetes.  As  late  as  the  Middle  Ages,  the  title 
of  Spanish  magistrates  was  judices.     The  highest 

i  Which  Movers  (Pfionizier,  ii.  1,  536)  has  improperly 
overlooked.  As  those  who  exercised  governmental  func- 
tions, properly  symbolized  by  the  sceptre,  the  Greek  lan- 
guage could  scarcely  call  them  anything  else  than  patnKeis. 
Some  good  remarks  against  Heeren's  view  of  this  matter 
were  made  by  J.  G.  Schlosser  (A/isioteUs1  Politik,  i.  195, 
196). 

•2  It  is  only  necessary  to  refer  to  Du  Cange,  under  Ju- 
dices. Similar  relations  occur  in  the  early  political  and 
judicial  history  of  all  nations.  Cf.  Grimm,  Rec/itsaiierthiimer, 
p.  75*3,  etc. 

3  [Dr.  Oassel,  in  striving  after  brevity,  has  here  left  a 
point  of  considerable  interest  in  obscurity.  Ver.  20  reads 
as  follows  :  t(  And  the  anger  of  Jehovah  was  kindled  against 
Israel,  and  he  said,  Because  this  people  hath  transgressed 
my  covenant  which  I  commanded  their  fathers,  and  have 
not  hearkened  to  my  voice,  I  also  will  not,1'  etc.  How  is 
this  verse  connected  with  the  preceding  ?  Vers.  11-19 
have  given  a  bird's-eye  view  of  the  whole  period  of  the 
Judges.  They  have  described  it  as  a  period  of  constantly 
renewed  backsliding,  calling  down  God's  anger  on  Israel, 
and  not  permanently  cured  even  by  the  efforts  of  the 
Judges.  Thereupon  ver.  20  proceeds  as  above;  and  the 
question  arises,  to  what  point  of  time  in  the  whole  period  it 
is  to  be  referred.  Dr.  Bachmann  argues  that  iu  ver.  20  the 
narrative  goes  back  to  the  fr  sentence "  pronounced  at 
Bochim  (see  ver.  3).  "  Ver.  20,"  he  says,  "  adds  [to  the  sur- 
vey in  vers.  11-19]  that,  before  God"s  anger  attained  its 
complete  expression  in  delivering  Israel  into  the  hands  of 
strange  nations  {ver.  14),  it  had  already  manifested  itself  in 
the  determination  not  to  drive  those  nations  out ;  and  with 
this   the  narrative  returns  to   the  judgment   of  Bochim." 

Accordingly,  he  interprets  the  **)pSsl,  *'and  he  said,"  of 
ver.  20,  as  introducing  an  actual  divine  utterance,  namely, 
the  one  delivered  at  Bochim.  Without  following  the  whole 
course  of  Dr.  Bachmann's  argument,  it  is  enough  here  to 
say  that  his  conclusion  is  surely  wrong,  and  that  the  source 
of  hiR  error  lies  in  the  view  he  takes  of  the  words  spoken  at 
Bochim,  which  are  not  a  ''  sentence  "  or  ''judgment,'' but 
*  warning t  designed  to  obviate  the  necessity  for  denouncing 
udgment.     The  true  connection,  in  my  judgment  (and  as 


officer  of  Sardinia  was  termed  judex.'2  The  Israel 
itish  Judges  differ  from  the  suffetes,  not  so  much 
by  the  nature  of  their  official  activity,  as  by  the 
source,  purpose,  and  extent  of  their  power.  In 
Israel  also  common  shophetim  existed  everywhere  ; 
but  the  persons  whom  God  selected  as  deliverers 
were  in  a  peculiar  sense  men  ut"  divine  law  and 
order.  They  were  not  regular  but  extraordinary 
authorities.  Hence,  they  were  not,  like  the  suf- 
fetes, chosen  by  the  people.  God  himself  appointed 
them.  The  spirit  of  the  national  faith  placed  then: 
at  the  head  of  the  people. 

Ver.  20,  etc.*  I  will  not  go  on  to  drive  out  a 
man  of  the  nations  which  Joshua  left  when  he 
died.  The  purport  of  this  important  sentence, 
which  connects  chapters  i.  and  iii.  historically  and 
geographically,  is  as  follows:  The  whole  land, 
from  the  wilderness  of  Edom  to  Mount  Casius  and 
the  "  road  to  Hamath,"  and  from  Jordan  to  the 
sea,  was  intended  for  Israel.  But  it  had  not  been 
given  to  Joshua  to  clear  this  whole  territory.  A 
group  of  nations,  enumerated  ch.  iii.  3,  had  re- 
mained in  their  seats.  Nor  did  the  individual 
tribes,  when  they  took  possession  of  their  allot- 
ments, make  progress  against  them  (cf.  ch.  i.  19, 
34).  Especially  does  this  explain  what  is  said 
above,  eh.  i.  31,  of  the  tribe  of  Asher.  Israel, 
therefore]  was  still  surrounded  by  a  circle  of  hea- 
then nations,  living  within  its  promised  borders,  to 
say  nothing  of  those  who  with  their  idolatry  were 
tolerated  in  the  territory  actually  subjugated  (cf. 
ch.  i.  21,  27,  30J.  These  were  the  nations  by 
whom  temptations  and  conflicts  were  prepared  for 
Israel,  and  against  whom,  led  by  divinely-inspired 
heroes,  it  rose  in  warlike  and  successful  resistance 

I  think  Dr.  Cassel  also  conceives  it),  is  as  follows:  When 
Joshua  ceased  from  war,  there  were  still  many  nations  left 
in  possession  of  territory  intended  for  Israel,  cf.  Josh.  xiii. 
1  ff.  They  were  left  temporarily,  and  for  the  good  of  Israel, 
cf.  Judg.  ii.  22,  23,  iii.  1.  2.  At  the  same  time  Israel  was 
warned  against  the  danger  that  thus  arose,  and  distinctly 
told  that  if  they  entered  into  close  and  friendly  relations 
with  the  people  thus  left,  Jehovah  would  not  drive  them 
out  at  all,  but  would  leave  them  to  heroine  a  scourge  to 
them,  Josh,  xxiii.  12  f.  Nevertheless,  Israel  sooq  adopted  a 
line  of  conduct  towards  them  such  as  rendered  it  inevitable 
that  the  prohibited  relations  must  soon  be  established,  cf. 
Judg.  i.  Then  came  the  warning  of  Bochim.  It  proved 
unavailing.  Israel  entered  into  the  closest  connections  with 
the  heathen,  forsook  Jehovah,  and  served  Baal  aud  Ashta- 
roth,   ch.  iii.  6,  ii.  11  ff.     The  contingency  of  Josh,   xxiii. 

12,  13  had  actually  occurred,  and  its  conditional  threat 
passed  over  into  irrevocable  determination  on  the  part  of 
Jehovah.  The  time  of  the  determination  falls  therefore  iu 
the  earlier  part  of  the  period  of  the  Judges  ;  but  as  the 
moment  at  which  it  went  into  force  was  not  signalized  by 
any  public  announcement,  and  as  each  successive  apostasy 
added,  so  to  speak,  to  its  finality,  the  author  of  the  Book 
of  Judges  makes  express  mention  of  it  (allusion  to  it  there 
is  already  in  vers.  14  b,  15  a.)  only  at  the  close  of* his 
survey,  where,  moreover,  it  furnished  an  answer  to  the 
question  which  the  review  itself  could  not  fail  to  suggest, 
Why  did  God  leave  these  nations  to  be  a  constant  snare  to 
Israel?  why  was  it,  that  even  the  most  heroic  Judges., 
men  full  of  faith  in  God  and  zeal  for  Israel,  did  not  exter- 
minate them  ?  The  H72fcsa^  of  ver.  20,  therefore,  does  not 
introduce  an  actual  divine  utterance.  The  author  derivee 
his  knowledge  of  God's  determination,  first,  from  Josh,  xxiii. 

13.  and  secondly,  from  the  course  of  the  history  ;  but  in 
order  to  give  tmpressiveness  and  force  to  his  statement,  he 
'■clothes  it  in  the  form  of  a  sentence  pronounced  by  God  *' 

(Keil).  The  T  in  ~1HST  denotes  logical,  not  temporal, 
sequence.  On  the  connection  of  ver.  22  ff.  with  ver.  21,  se« 
note  7  under  the  test.  —  Ta.] 


CHAPTER    III.    1- 


63 


With  their  enumeration,  briefly  made  in  ch.  iii. 
1-5,  the  au  hor  closes  his  introduction  to  the  nar- 
ration of  subsequent  events.  The  historical  and 
moral  background  on  which  these  arise,  is  now 
clear.  Not  only  the  scene  and  the  combatants,  but 
also  the  causes  of  conflict  and  victory  have  been 
indicated. 

HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

The  judgments  of  God  are  indescribable  —  his 
compassion  is  indefatigable.  Whatever  God  had 
promised  in  the  law,  must  come  to  pass,  be  it  pros- 
perity or  distress.  Apostasy  is  followed  by  ruin  ; 
the  loss  of  character  by  that  of  courage.  Heroes 
become  cowards  ;  conquerors  take  to  flight.  Shame 
and  scorn  came  upon  the  name  of  Israel.  The 
nation  could  no  longer  protect  its  cities,  nor  indi- 
viduals their  homes.  In  distress,  the  people  re- 
turned to  the  altars  which  in  presumptuous  pride 
they  had  left.  Old  Israel  wept  when  it  heard  the 
preaching  of  repentance ;  new  Israel  weeps  only 
when  it  feels  the  sword  of  the  enemy.  And  God's 
compassion  is  untiring.  He  gave  them  deliverers, 
choosing  them  from  among  Israel's  judges,  making 
them  strong  for  victory  and  salvation.  But  in  hi* 
mercy  He  chastened  them.  For  Israel  must  be 
trained  and  educated  by  means  of  judgment  and 
mercy.  The  time  to  save  them  by  a  king  had  not 
yet  come.  Judah  had  formerly  led  the  van  ;  but 
neither  was  the  education  of  this  tribe  completed. 
Judges  arose  in  Israel ;  but  their  office  was  not 
hereditary.  When  the  Judge  died  a  condition  of 
national  affairs  ensued  like  that  which  followed  the 
death  of  Joshua:  the  old  remained  faithful,  the 
young  apostatized.  The  Judges  for  the  most  part 
exercised  authority  in  single  tribes.  The  heathen 
were  not  expelled  from  the  borders  assigned  to  Is- 
rael ;  Israel  must  submit  to  ever-renewed  trials ;  and 
when  it  failed  to  stand,  then  came  the  judgment. 
But  in  this  discipline,  compassion  constantly  mani- 
fested itself  anew.  The  word  of  God  continued  to 
manifest  its  power.  It  quietly  reared  up  heroes 
and  champions.  The  contents  of  these  verses  form 
the  substance  of  the  whole  Book.  Israel  must 
contend,  —  1,  with  sin,  and  2,  with  enemies  ;  it  ex- 
periences.—  1,  the  discipline  of  judgment,  and  2, 
the  discipline  of  compassion ;  but  in  contest  and  in 
discipline  that  which  approves  itself  is,  —  1 ,  the  vic- 
tory of  repentance,  and  2,  the  obedience  of  faith. 


Thus  the  contents  of  the  Book  of  Judges  afford 
a  look  into  the  history  of  Christian  nations.  They 
have  found  by  experience  what  even  in  a  modern 
novel  the  author  almost  involuntarily  puts  into  the 
mouth  of  one  of  his  characters  (B.  Abeken,  Grei- 
fensee,  i.  43):  "Truly,  when  once  the  granite 
rock  on  which  the  church  is  reared  has  crumbled 
away,  all  other  foundations  crumble  after  it,  and 
nothing  remains  but  a  nation  of  cowards  and  volup- 
tuaries." A  glance  into  the  spiritual  life  shows 
the  same  process  of  chastisement  and  compassion. 
The  Apostle  says  (2  Cor.  xii.  7):  "And  lest  I 
should  be  exalted  above  measure  through  the  abun- 
dance of  the  revelations,  there  was  given  to  me  a 
thorn  in  the  flesh,  the  messenger  of  Satan,  to  buffet 
me,  lest  I  should  be  exalted  above  measure.  For  this 
thing  I  besought  the  Lord  thrice,  that  it  might  de- 
part from  me.  And  he  said  unto  me,  My  grace  is 
sufficient  for  thee :  for  my  strength  is  made  perfect  in 
weakness."  A  recent  philosopher  ( Fischer,  Gesch. 
der  neueren  Philos.,  i.  1 1 )  detines  philosophy  to  lie, 
not  so  much  universal  science,  as  self-knowledge.  If 
this  be  correct,  repeutanee  is  the  true  philosophy , 
for  in  repentance  man  learns  to  know  himself  in 
all  the  various  conditions  of  apostasy  and  ruin, 
reflection  and  return,  pride  and  penitence,  heart- 
quickening  and  longing  after  divine  compassion. 

Starke  :  Fathers,  by  a  bad  example,  make 
their  children  worse  than  themselves  ;  for  from  old 
sins,  new  ones  are  continually  growing,  The  same  ■ 
Although  God  knows  and  might  immediately  pun- 
ish all  that  is  hidden  in  men,  his  wisdom  employs 
temptation  and  other  means  to  bring  it  to  the  light, 
that  his  justice  may  be  manifest  to  his  creatures. 
The  same  :  Through  tribulation  and  the  cross  to 
the  exercise  of  faith  and  obedience,  prayer  and  hope. 
And  all  this  tends  to  our  good  ;  for  God  tempts  no 
one  to  evil.  The  same  :  Though  God  permit,  He 
does  not  approve,  the  unrighteous  oppressor  of  the 
unrighteous,  but  punishes  his  unrighteousness  when 
his  help  is  invoked.  Lisco  :  God's  judgment  on 
Israel  is  the  non-destruction  of  the  heathen. 
Gerlach  :  From  the  fact  that  the  whole  history 
does  at  the  same  time,  through  scattered  hints,  point 
to  the  flourishing  period  of  Israel  under  the  kin^s, 
we  learn  that  these  constantly-recurring  events 
do  not  constitute  a  fruitless  circle,  ever  returning 
whence  it  started,  but  that  through  them  all,  God's 
providence  conducted  his  people,  by  a  road  won- 
derfully involved,  to  a  glorious  goal. 


Enumeration  of  (ho  heathen  nation*  left  to  prove  Israel. 
Chapter  III.     1-4. 


1  Now  these  are  the  nations  which  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  left  [at  rest],  to  prove  Israel 
by  them,  (even  as  many  of  Israel  as  had  not  known  [by  experience]  all  the  wars  of  Canaan  ; 

2  Only  that  the  generations  of  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel   might  know  to  teach  tliem 

3  war.  at  the  least  such  as  before  knew  nothing  thereof ;  )'  Namely,  five  lords  [principalities] 
of  the  Philistines,  and  all  the  Canaanites,  and  the  Sidonians,  and  the  Hi~ites  that 
dwelt  [dwell]  in  mount  Lebanon,  from  mount  Baal-hermon   unto  the  entering  in  of 

I  [lit.  unto  the  coming  i.e.  the  road  to]  Hamath.  And  they  were  to  prove  Israel  by  them,  to 
know  whether  they  would  hearken  unto  the  commandments  of  the  Lord  [Jeho- 
vah],  which  he  commanded  their  fathers  by  the  hand  of  Moses. 


u 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[l  Ver.  2  —  Dr.  C&ssel  renders  this  verse  freely :  cc  Only  that  to  give  experience  to  the  generations  of  the  sons  of  Lv 

rael,  they  might  teach  them  war  which  they  did  not  formerly  learn  to  know.TI     He  supplies  a   second   7^?Q7    befori 

□172^^)  (see  the  exposition  below),  and  in  a  note  (.which  we  transfer  from  the  foot  of  the  page),  remarks  :  "  Ver.  2  con- 
tains'two*  subordinate  clauses  dependent  on  the  subject  of  the  principal  sentence  in  ver.  1,  which  is  r  Jehovah.'  In  the 
first  of  these  clauses  (each  of  which  is  introduced  by  ]VQ7),  the  subject  is  ( Israel1  (fully,  ^""O^  fiTT^T):  m 
the  second,  ( the  nations.'  The  first  expresses  the  result  of  the  second;  that  which  Israel  experiences  is,  that  the  na- 
tions teach  it  war."    Keil  (who  follows  Bertheau)  explains  as  follows  : t(  only  (p^,    with    no  other  view    than)  to    know 

the  subsequent  generations  (j"Yl*"l'*T,  the  generations  after  Joshua  and  his  contemporaries)  of  the  sons  of  Israel,  that 
He    (Jehovah)   might  teach  them  war,  only  those  who  had  not  learned  to  know  them  (the  wars  of  Canaan)."     But,  1,  if 

iTl")^     were  in  the  accus.,  the  author  could  hardly  have  failed  to  remove  all  ambiguity  by   prefixing  VIS   to  it-     2. 

An  iufin.  of  design  with  7,  following  one  with  7VQ7,  without  *1  to  indicate  coordination,  can  only  be  subordi- 
nate to  the  preceding.  Thus  in  the  English  sentence  :  tf  We  eat  in  order  to  live  to  work,''  (t  to  work,"  would  be  at 
once  interpreted  as  subordinate  to  "  to  live."     A   second   ]V£2v  might  indicate  coordination  even  without  the  assis- 

lance  of  ')  cf.  in  English:  ,(  We  eat  in  order  to  live,  in  order  to  work;"  where  we  feel  at  once  that  "to  live  '' 
and  t(  to  work  "  are  coordinate  so  far  as  their  relation  to  the  principal  verb  is  concerned.  Hence,  Dr.  Cassel  iusertt 
a  second  ]}?ft?j  but  this  is  an  expedient  too  much  like  cutting  the  Gordiau  knot  to  be  satisfactory.  Bachmann, 
who   in  the  main  agrees  with  our  author,   avoids  this  by    treating     D^Sl77   as   a  gerundive  adverbial  phrase.     As 

for  nV^T  it  is  not  indeed  impossible  that,  remembering  what  he  said  in  ch.  ii.  10  (^V^  S/,  etc.),  and  just 
now  substantially  repeated  in  ver.  1  b,  the  writer  of  Judges  uses  it  here  absolutely,  to  indicate  briefly  the  opposite  of 

the  condition   there  described,  in  which  case  Dr.  Cassel's  rendering  would  be  sufficiently  justified.     But    since    iHIHl 

W*1   N32    (ver.  2  a)  clearly  represents  the    M^  "Ht^S    /3    HS   of  ver.  1  b,  it  seems  obvious  that  the  JH3?"-!  of 

ver.  2  in  like  manner  resumes  the   ]VD3    fTlttrwQ"73    j""lS    ^""P    of   ver.  1.     We  may  suppose,  therefore,  that 

the  pronoun  "them"  is  here,  as  frequently,  omitted  after  j^l^T,  and  translate,  freely,  thus:  "And  these  are  the 
nations  which  Jehovah  left  to  prove  Israel  by  them  —  all  that  Israel  which  did  not  know  all  the  wars  of  Canaan,  in 
order  that  the  after  generations  of  Israel  (they  also)  might  know  (understand  and  appreciate)  them  (i.  e.  those  wars),  in 
that  he  (t.  e.  Jehovah,  or  they,  the  nations)  taught  them  war,  (not  war  in  general,  however,  but)  only  the  wars  whict 
(or,  such  wars  as)  they  did  not  formerly  know."  The  first  p*^  as  Bachmann  remarks,  limits  the  design  of  Jehovah,  the 
second  the  thing  to  be  taught.  As  to  the  last  clause  of  ver.  2,  if  the  accents  be  disregarded,  the  only  difficulty  in  the 
way  of  the  rendering  here  given  is  the  plural  suffix  Q  ■  but  this  probably  arises  from  the  fact  that  the  writer's  mind  at 
once  recurs  to  the  "  wars  of  Canaan."  The  0*007,  of  old,  is  used  from  the  point  of  time  occupied  by  the  'r  after  gen- 
erations," as  was  natural  to  a  writer  who  lived  so  late  as  the  period  of  kings,  and  not  from  that  in  which  the  n*0n 
of  ver.  1,  and  its  design,  took  place.  The  masculine  Q  to  represent  a  fern.  plur.  is  not  very  unfrequent,  cf.  2  Sam.  xx.  3  ; 
2  Kgs.  xviii.  13.     Dr.  Bachmann  connects  the  last  clause  with    jHV7!,  respects  the  accents  (which  join   O*0£7  with 

"1T27S,   not  with  D*1^?T*    S  7),  and  renders :  "  that  Israel  might  learn  to  know  .     .     .     war,  namely,    cnly  those 

(wars)  which  were  formerly,  they  did  not  know  them=  only  the  former  wars  which  they  did  not  know."  The  sense  is  not 
materially  affected  by  this  change.  — Tb.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL- 

Ver.  1.  All  who  had  not  experienced  the 
wars  of  Canaan.  Those  are  they  of  whom  it  was 
said,  ch.  ii.  10,  that  they  "  knew  not  the  works  of 
the  Lord."  This  younger  generation,  after  the 
death  of  Joshua  and  the  elders,  enjoyed  the  fruits 
of  conquest,  but  did  not  estimate  aright  the  great- 
ness of  the  dangers  endured  by  the  fathers,  aud 
therefore  did  not  sufficiently  value  the  help  of  God. 
The  horrors  of  war,  to  be  known,  must  be  ex- 
perienced. As  if  the  conquest  of  Canaan  had  been 
jf  easy  achievement !  It  was  no  light  thing  to 
triumph  over  the  warlike  nations.  Was  not  the 
tribe  of  Judah,  although  victorious,  obliged  never- 
theless to  abandon  the  valley  to  the  iron  chariots  ? 
But  of  that  the  rising  generation  no  longer  wished 
to  know  anything.  They  did  not  know  what  "  a 
rar  with  Canaan  signified." 


Ver.  2.  Only  that  to  give  experience  to 
the  generations  of  the  sons  of  Israel  they 
might  teach  them  war,  with  which  they  did 
not  before  become  acquainted.  The  construc- 
tion of  the  sentence  is  difficult,  and  conse- 
quently has  been  frequently  misunderstood  (among 
others,  by  Bertheau).  The  book  which  the  nar- 
rator  is  about  to  write,  is  a  Book  of  Wars  ;  and  it 
is  therefore  incumbent  upon  him  to  state  the  moral 
causes  in  which  these  originated.  God  proves  Is- 
rael for  its  own  good.  With  this  in  view,  "  He  left 
the  nations  in  peace,  to  prove  Israel  by  them." 
How  prove  Israel?  By  depriving  it  of  rest  through 
them.  They  compel  Israel  to  engage  in  conflict. 
In  defeat  the  people  learn  to  know  the  violence  of 
Canaanitish  oppression,  and,  when  God  sends  them 
heroes,  the  preeiousness  of  the  boon  of  restored 
freedom.      Only  for  this  ;  the  emphasis  of  the  verse 


CHAPTER    III.    1-4. 


65 


foils  on  only  (P-^),  which  is  introduced  twice.  Be- 
tween bsnif.  and  WV^f7  a  ]V^1  1  is  to  he 
supplied.  The  Hebrew  usus  loquendi  places  both 
clauses  (HSU  ^Q1?  and  OlT^f?   7?tf?),  each 

beginning  with  1V?7i  alongside  of  each  other 
without  any  connective,  whereby  one  sets  forth  the 
ground  of  the  other.  God  leaves  the  nations  in 
peace,  "  in  order  that  they  might  teach  the  Israel- 
ites what  war  with  Canaan  signified,  —  in  order 
that  those  generations  might  know  it  who  had  not 
yet  experienced  it."  It  is  not  tor  technical  instruc- 
tion in  military  science  that  He  leaves  the  heathen 
nations  in  the  land,  but  that  Israel  may  know  what 
it  is  to  wage  war,  that  without  God  it  can  do  noth- 
ing against  Canaan,  and  that,  having  in  the  deeds 
of  contemporary  heroes  a  present  counterpart  of 
the  experience  of  their  fathers,  who  beheld  the 
mighty  works  which  God  wrought  for  Israel 
through  Moses  and  Joshua,  it  may  learn  humility 
and  submission  to  the  law.  This  reason  why  God 
did  not  cause  the  Canaanites  to  be  driven  out, 
does  not,  however,  contradict  that  given  in  ch.  ii. 
22.  Israel  can  apostatize  from  God,  only  when  it 
has  forgotten  Him.  The  consequence  is  servitude. 
In  this  distress,  God  sends  them  Judges.  These 
triumph,  in  glorious  wars,  over  victorious  Canaan 
Grateful  Israel,  being  now  able  to  conceive,  in  their 
living  reality,  the  wonders  by  which  God  formerly 
raised  it  to  the  dignity  of  nationality,  lias  learned  to 
know  the  hand  of  its  God.    Cf.  ver.  4. 

Ver.  3.  Five  principalities  of  the  Philistines. 
Josh.  xiii.  2,  seq.,  enumerates  the  nations  which 
were  to  remain,  with  still  more  distinctness.  There, 
however,  the  reason,  given  in  our  passage,  why  God 
let  them  remain,  is  uot  stated.  The  principalities 
of  the  Philistines  must  be  treated  of  elsewhere. 
The  Canaanites  and  the  Zidonians  are  the  inhabi- 
tants of  the  Phoenician  coast.  The  importance  of 
Zidon  has  already  been  pointed  out  in  ch.  i.  31. 
The  districts  not  under  Zidonian  supremacy,  are 
referred  to  by  the  general  term  "  Canaanite."  The 
Hivite,  here  mentioned  as  an  inhabitant  of  Mount 
Lebanon,  does  not  occur  under  that  name  in  Josh 
xiii.  5.  He  is  there  spoken  of  under  the  terms, 
"land  of  the  Giblites  (Byblus,  etc.)  and  all  Leba- 
non ; "  here,  a  more  general  designation  is  em- 
ployed. The  name  "?n  indicates  and  explains 
this  in  a  manner  highly  interesting.     The  LXX. 

render  ^n   by  Evaios ,  as  for   H  jjn,  the  mother  of 

all  the   living,  they  give  E(/o.     The   word  f^J^, 

'^t'7'  t0  ''ve>  whence  i"Wn,  includes  the  idea  of 
"  roundness,  circularity  of  form  "  So  the  o>6v, 
ovum,  egg,  is  round,  and  at  the  same  time  the  source 

of  life.  Consequently,  n*n  and  i~nn  came  to 
signify  battle-array  or  encampment  (cf.  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  11)  and  village  (Num.  xxxii.  41 ),  from  the 
circular  form  in  which  camps  and  villages  were 
disposed.  The  people  called  Hivite  is  the  people 
that  resides  in  roundviUages.  Down  to  the  present 
day  —  marvelous  tenacity  of  national  custom!  — 
the  villages  in  Syria  are  so  built  that  the  eonicallv- 
shaped  houses  form  a  circular  street,  inclosing  an 
open  space  in  the  centre  for  the   herds  and  flocks. 

1  Cf.  Josh.  iv.  24.  [Compare  the  Dote  under  «  Textual 
yii)  Grammatical."  —  Tr.] 

3  Cf.  Preller,  Gr.  Mylkol.,  i.  77.  He  is  such  as  ixpalos, 
tnaicpios.  etc.  That  direcrdvTios  also  has  no  other  meaning. 
PrelliT  Bhows  elsewhere.  Mountain  temples,  says  Welcker 
5 


Modern  travellers  have  found  this  style  of  building 
still  in  use  from  the  Orontes  to  the  Euphrates 
(Hitter,  xvii.  169S).  It  distinguished  the  Hivite 
from  the  other  nations.  And  it  is,  in  fact,  found 
only  beyond  the  boundary  here  indicated ;  on 
northern  Lebanon,  above  Mount  Hermon.  This 
therefore  also  confirms  the  remarks  made  above  (at 
ch.  i.  33),  ou  the  parallel  passage,  Josh.  xiii.  5, 
where  we  find  the  definition  "  from  Baal-gad  under 
Mount  Hermon,"  whereas  here  we  read  of  a 
"mount  Baal  Hermon."  Baal  Hermon,  according 
to  its  signification,  corresponds  exactly  with  the 
present  name  Jebel  esh-Sheikh,  since  on  the  one 
hand  Sheikh  may  stand  tor  Baal,  while,  on  the 
other,  Hermon  derived  its  name  from  its  peculiar 

form.  TO~?r!  is  a  dialectic  equivalent  of  the  He- 
brew  PS3~)S.     I2~S  is  the  height,  the  highlands: 

]1!2~IS  the  prominent  point,  the  commanding  for- 
tress. Hermon,  as  the  southern  foot  of  Anti-Libanus, 
is  it-  loftiest  peak.  It  towers  grandly,  like  a  giant 
(cf.  Ritter,  xvii.  151,  211),  above  all  its  surround- 
ings, —  like  a  silver-rooted  fortress  of  God.  This  is 
not  the  only  instance  in  which  Hermon  is  ap- 
parently the  name  of  a  mountain.  It  is  probable 
indeed  that  to  the  Greeks  the  Hernuean  Promon- 
tory ('Epu.aia  &Kpa,  Polyb.  I.  xxxvi.  11  ;  cf.  Man- 
nert,  Geogr.,  x.  ii.  512)  suggested  only  some 
reference  to  Hermes.  But  the  greater  the  diffi- 
culty of  seeing  why  Hermes  should  give  names  to 
mountain  peaks,  the  more  readily  do  we  recognize  a 

]"^":CJ>  not  only  in  this  but  also  in  the  promontory 
of  Lemnos,  the  Hermsean  Rock  ('Ep.uaiW  \eVas) 
mentioned  by  Greek  poets  (iEschyl.  Again.,  283). 
It  accords  with  this  that  Ptolemy  specifies  a  Her- 
nuean Promontory  in  Crete  also.  It  is  evident 
how  appropriately  Hermon,  in  its  signification  of 
Armon,  "  a  fortress-like,  towering  eminence,"  is 
used  to  denote  a  promontory.  The  Greek  lutpa  also 
has  the  twofold  signification  of  fortress  and  prom- 
ontory; and  Mount  Hermon  itself  may  to  a  certain 
extent  be  considered  to  be  both  one  and  the  other. 

It  is  evident  that  when  in  Josh.  xiii.  5  the  bound- 
ary of  the  hostile  nations  is  defined  as  running 
from  "  Baal-gad  under  Mount  Hermon,"  and  here 
as  extending  "  from  Baal  Hermon  "  onward,  the 
same  -acred  locality  is  meant  in  both  passages,  and 
that  Baal  Hermon  is  identified  with  Baal-gad. 
This  is  further  continued  by  the  following  :  The 
Talmud  ( Chulin,  40  a )  speaks  of  the  sinful  worship 

which  is  rendered  ~^3"^  ^7?  ■ '  ,0  ,ne  Godaof  the 
mountain,  i.  e.  as  Raschi  explains,  the  angel  like 
unto  Michael,  who  is  placed  over  the  mountains  of 
the  world.  Moses  ha-Cohen  advances  an  equally 
ancient  conception,  current  also  among  the  Ara- 
bians, when  he  states  [ap.  Ibn  Ezra,  on  Isa.  lxv. 
11),  that  Baal-gad  is  the  star  Zedek.  i.  e.  Zeus. 
For  Zeus  is  in  fact  the  Hellenic  deity  of  all  moun- 
tain-peaks,'- the  Great  Baal  Hermon.  Hence  it  was 
customary  among  the  Hellenes  also  to  preparo 
sacrificial  tables  in  the  service  of  Zeus ;  and  with 
Isa.  lxv.  11  we  may  profitably  compare  Pans.  ix. 
40,  where  we  learn  that  in  Chieronea,  where  the 
sceptre  of  Zeus  was  venerated  as  a  palladium,  "a 
table  with  meat  and  pastry  was  daily  "  prepared. 
At  the  birth  of  a  son  to  her  maid,  Leah  says  (Gen. 

(Mythologie,  i.  170),  were  erected  to  other  gods  only  excep 
tionally.  Ab  for  the  temple  of  Hernies  on  Mount  Cellene 
(Paus.  viii.  17,  1),  it  could  perhaps  be  made  probable  thai 
here  also  the  name  of  the  mountain  suggested  the  worship 
of  Hermes. 


66 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


xxx.  11):  "'3  S3  ;  which  the  Chaldee  translators 
already  rentier  by  S2tS  S13  (Jerus.  Targ.)  and 
S2D   sVt!3  (Jonath.).    ilTfiQ  (cf.  2  Kgs.  xxiii. 

5),  means,  star;  21 JD  >TO  is  the  good  star  that  ap- 
pears, —  fortune,  as  the  Septuaginta  render  ru^r;. 
Two  planets,  Jupiter  and  Venus,  were  ayaBovpyoi 
(Plutarch,  Oe  Is.  et  Os.,  cap.  xlviii.),  hearers  of 
what  is  good. —  fortune-bringers.  Hence,  Gad,  as 
"  Fortune, "  could  be  connected  both  with  Astarte 
(cf.  Movers,  Phorn.,  i.  636),  and  with  Baal  (Jupi- 
ter).     13   is  manifestly  the  same  as  the  Persian 

Kin  (cf.  lis  and  Tin,  bra  and  ban,  etc.), 

Ghoda,  which  signifies  god  and  lord,  quite  in  the 

cense  of  /??  (cf.  Vullers,  Lex.  Pers.  Lat.,  i. 
660).  If  there  be  any  connection  between  this 
term  and  the.  Zendic  hhadhata,  it  is  only  that  the 
latter  was  used  to  designate  the  constellations.  In 
heathen  views  of  life,  fortune  and  good  coincide. 
To  enjoy  the  good  things  of  life  is  to  be  fortunate. 
Ayofli;  tvxti  is  the  Hellenic  for  happiness.  The 
Syriac  and  Chaldee  versions  almost  uniformly  ren- 
der the  terms  ^tPN  and  pLaxaptos,  blessed,  which 
occur  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  by   D1I2, 

good  (cf.  my  work  Irene,  Erf.  1855,  p.  9).  In  13 
the  ideas  God  and  Fortune  coexist  as  yet  un- 
resolved ;  subsequently,  especially  in  the  Christian 
age,  they  were  separated  in  the  Germanic  dialects 
as  God  and  Good.  For  there  is  no  doubt  that  in 
Gad  (God),  the  good  (fortunate)  god  and  constel- 
lation, we  find  the  oldest  form,  and  for  that  reason 
a  serviceable  explanation,  of  the  name  God,  which, 
like  Elohim,  disengaging  itself  from  heathen  con- 
ceptions, became  the  sacred  name  of  the  Absolute 
Spirit.  At  the  same  time  it  affords  us  the  philolog- 
ical advantage  of  perceiving,  what  has  often  been 
contested  (cf.  DiefFenbach,  Goth.  Lex.  ii.  416; 
Grimm.  Myth.  pp.  12,  1199,  etc.),  that  God  and 
Good  actually  belong  together.  Baal-gad  was  the 
God  of  Fortune,  which  was  held  to  be  the  highest 

good.1  —  The  meaning  of  flOn  WO?  has  been 
indicated  above  (p.  46). 

HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

[Compare  the  Homiletical  Hints  of  the  preced- 
ing section.  —  Keil  :  In  the  wars  of  Canaan 
under  Joshua,  Israel  had  reamed  and  experienced 
that  the  power  which  subdued  its  enemies  consisted 
not  in  the  multitude  and  valor  of  its  warriors  but 
in  the  might  of  its  God,  the  putting  forth  of  which 
however  depended  upon  Israel's  continued  faithful- 
ness  towards  its  Possessor Now,  in 

order  to  impress  them  with  this  truth,  on  which 
the  existence  and  prosperity  of  Israel,  and  the 
realization  of  the  purpose  for  which  they  had  been 
divinely  called,  depended  ;  in  other  words,  in  order 
to  show  them  by  the  practical  lessons  of  experience 
that  the  People  of  Jehovah  can  fight  and  conquer 
only  in    the  strength   of  their  God,  the  Lord  had 

1  Movers  (Phan.  ii.  2,  515)  thinks  that  he  can  explain 
ihe  name  of  the  Numidian  seaport  Cirta  from  *T3  U?S"^, 
tfhich  is  doubtful.  On  the  other  hand,  when  the  Etymolog. 
Magnum,  under  TdSeipa,  expresses  the  opinion  that 
fades  in  Spain  was  so  named  because  "  ya£oe   nap  avroUrb 


suffered  the  Canaanites  to  be  left  in  the  land. 
Necessity  teaches  prayer.  The  distress  into  whicfc 
Israel  fell  by  means  of  the  remaining  Canaanites, 
was  a  divine  discipline,  by  which  the  Lord  would 
bring  the  faithless  back  to  Himself,  admonish  them 
to  follow  his  commands,  and  prepare  them  for  the 
fulfillment  of  his  covenant-engagements.  Hence, 
the  learning  of  war,  i.  e.  the  learning  how  the 
People  of  the  Lord  should  fight  against  the  enemies 
of  God  and  his  kingdom,  was  a  means  ordained 
by  God  of  tempting  or  trying  Israel,  whether  thej 
would  hearken  to  the  commands  of  their  God  and 
walk  in  the  ways  of  the  Lord.  When  Israel 
learned  so  to  war,  it  learned  also  to  keep  the  divine 
commands.  Both  were  necessary  to  the  People  of 
God.  For  as  the  realization  by  the  people  of  the 
blessings  promised  in  the  covenant  depended  on 
their  giving  heed  to  the  voice  of  the  Lord,  so  also 
the  conflict  appointed  for  them  was  necessary,  at 
well  for  their  personal  purification,  as  for  the  con- 
tinued existence  and  growth  of  the  kingdom  of 
God  on  earth.  —  Bertheau  :  The  historian  can- 
not sufficiently  insist  on  the  fact  that  the  remaining 
of  some  of  the  former  inhabitants  of  the  land,  after 
the  wars  of  Joshua,  is  not  a  punishment  but  only 
a  trial ;  a  trial  designed  to  afford  occasion  of  show- 
ing to  the  Israelites  who  lived  after  Joshua  benefits 
similar  to  those  bestowed  on  his  contemporaries. 
And  it  is  his  firm  conviction  that  these  benefits, 
consisting  chiefly  of  efficient  aid  and  wonderful  de- 
liverances in  wars  against  the  remaining  inhabi- 
tants, would  assuredly  have  accrued  to  the  people, 
if  they  had  followed  the  commands  of  Jehovah, 
especially  that  on  which  such  stress  is  laid  in  the 
Pentateuch,  to  make  no  league  with  the  heathen, 
but  to  make  war  on  them  as  long  as  a  man  of  them 
remains. 

Henry  :  It  was  the  will  of  God  that  Israel 
should  be  inured  to  war, — 1.  Because  their  country 
was  exceeding  rich  and  fruitful,  and  abounded 
with  dainties  of  all  sorts,  which  if  they  were  not 
sometimes  made  to  know  hardship,  would  be  in 
danger  of  sinking  them  into  the  utmost  degree  of 
luxury  and  effeminacy,  —  a  state  as  destructive  to 
everything  good  as  it  is  to  everything  great,  and 
therefore  to  be  carefully  watched  against  by  all 
God's  Israel.  2.  Because  their  country  iay  very 
much  in  the  midst  of  enemies,  by  whom  they  must 
expect  to  be  insulted  ;  for  God's  heritage  was  as  a 
speckled  bird  ;  the  birds  round  about  were  against 

her Israel  was  a  figure  of  the  church 

militant,  that  must  fight  its  way  to  a  triumphant 
state.  The  soldiers  of  Christ  must  endure  hard- 
ness. Corruption  is  therefore  left  remaining  in 
the  hearts  even  of  good  Christians,  that  they  may 
learn  war,  keep  on  the  whole  armor  of  God,  and 
stand  continually  on  their  guard. 

Wordsworth  :  "  To  teach  them  war."  So 
unbelief  awakens  faith,  and  teaches  it  war ;  it 
excites  it  to  contend  earnestly  for  the  truth.  The 
dissemination  of  false  doctrines  has  led  to  clearer 
assertions  of  the  truth.  Heresies  have  produced 
the  creeds.  "  There  must  be  heresies,"  says  the 
Apostle,  "  that  they  who  are  approved  among  yo< 
may  be  made  manifest"  (1  Cor.  xi.  19).  —  Tr.] 

e«  fiixpCiv  taKooop-npevov''  there  is  evidently  no  reference  to 
]l2p,  but  to  Gad  in  the  sense  of  Fortune.  For  the  stress 
is  laid  not  on  the  small  beginnings,  but  on  the  good  for 
tune,  which  from  a  small  city  made  it  great  Tbja  oi 
Movers,  ii.  2,  621,  not.  89  a. 


CHAPTER  ILL  5-11.  67 


PART  SECOND. 

The  History  of  Israel  under  the  Judges  :  a  history  of  sin,  ever  repeating  itself,  and 
of  Divine  Grace,  constantly  devising  new  means  of  deliverance.  Meanwhile,  however, 
the  imperfections  of  the  judicial  institute  display  themselves,  and  prepare  the  way  for 
the  Appointment  of  a  King. 


FIRST    SECTION. 


THE   SERVITUDE    TO  CHUSHAN-RISHATHAIM,   KINO    OP    MESOPOTAMIA.      OTHNIEL,     THE     JUDOK   Of 

BLAMELESS    AND    HAPPY    LIFE. 


Israel  is    given  up  into  the   power  of  Chushan-rishathaim  on    account  of  its  sins . 
Othniel  is  raised  up  as  a  Deliverer  in  a?iswer  to  their  penitence. 

Chapter  III.     5-11. 

5  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  dwelt  among  [in  the  midst  of]  the  Canaanites, 

6  Hittites,  and  Amorites,  and  Perizzites,  and  Hivites,  and  Jebusites:  And  they  took 
their  daughters  to  be  their  wives,  and  gave  their  daughters  to  their  sons,  and  served 

7  their  gods.  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  did  evil  '  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord 
[Jehovah],  and  forgat  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  their  God.  and  served  Baalim,  and  the 

8  groves  [Asheroth].  Therefore  [And]  the  anger  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  was  hot 
[kindled]  against  Israel,  and  he  sold  them  [gave  them  up]  into  the  hand  of  Chushan- 
rishathaim,  king  of  Mesopotamia  [  Aram-naharaim]  :  and  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel 

9  served  Chushan-rishathaim  eight  years.  And  when  [omit:  when]  the  children 
[sons]  of  Israel  cried  unto  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  [and]  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  raised 
up  a  deliverer  to  the  children   [sons]  of  Israel,  who   [and]    delivered  2  them,  even 

10  Othniel  the  son  of  Kenaz,  Caleb's  younger  brother.  And  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
[Jehovah]  came  [was]  s  upon  him,  and  he  judged  Israel,  and  went  out  to  war  :  and 
the  Lord  [Jehovah]  delivered  Chushan-rishathaim  king  of  Mesopotamia  [Aram] 
into  his  hand  ;  and   his  hand  prevailed   [became   strong] 4  against  Chushan-risha- 

1 1  thaim.     And  the  land  had  rest  forty  years :  and  Othniel  the  son  of  Kenaz  died. 

TEXTUAL  AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

[I  Ver.  7.  —  Literally,  "  the  evil,1'  as  at  verse  12  and  frequently.  On  the  use  of  the  article  compare  the  tr  Grammatical  " 
note  on  ch.  ii.  11.  Wordsworth's  note  on  the  present  verse  is  :  "  They  did  that  evil  which  God  had  forbidden  as  evil.' 
—  Tr.] 

2  Ver.  9.—  2j7,L*"i"1  (from  I?^),  here,  without  any  preposition,  with  /N^fTO  i~IS  '  on  the  other  hand 
at  2  Kgs.  xiv.  27,  "P2  is  inserted.     [De  Wette,  in  his  German  Version,  also  takes  Jehovah  as  subject  of  □3?",tt,'i!''l, 

which  seems  to  be  favored  by  the  position  of  vWOP^?  i*1M,  which  according  to  the  common  view  would  be  separated 
from  its  governing  verb  by  another  verb  with  a  different  and  unexpressed  subject.  But  Dr.  Cassel  is  certainly  wrong 
when  he  supplies  "through"  instead  of  the  "  even  "  of  our  E.  V.,  and  so  makes  "Othniel"  the  medium  by  whom 
Jehovah  delivered.  That  would  be  expressed  either  by  ~P3  or  by  2,  cf.  Hos.  i.  7  ;  1  Sam.  xiv  6;  xvii.  47  Th« 
»cil»   bS^Drn?    DS  are  in  apposition  with   V^EVTO.  —  Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  10.  —  So  do  Dr.  Cassel  and  many  others  render  TOTT  '  but  the  rendering  "  came  "  is  very  suitable,  if  wit* 
Or.  Bachmann,  we  assume  TTFn,   etc.,  to  be  explanatory  of  Df/*1,  etc.,  in  ver.  9.  —  TR.] 

4  Ver.  11  —  TVm.    from  TT37.     [On  the  vowel  in  the  last  syllable,  see  Ges    Gram.  67,  Rem  Jl  —  TR.J 

t    T  "'  -  T 


58 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


BXEOET1CAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vtr.  5.  And  the  sons  of  Israel  dwelt.  The 
introduction  is  ended,  and  the  author  now  proceeds 
to  the  events  themselves.  Fastening  the  thread  of 
his  narrative  to  the  relations  which  he  has  just 
unfolded,  he  goes  on  to  say:  Israel  (therefore) 
dwelt  among  the  Canaanite,  Hittite,  Amorite,  Per- 
izzite,  Hirite,  Jebusite.  The  last  of  these  tribes  he 
had  not  in  any  way  named  before  ;  nor,  apparently, 
is  it  accurate  to  say  that  Israel  dwelt  among  the 
Jebusites.  But  the  passage  is  a  deeply  significant 
citation.  Deut.  xx.  17  contains  the  following: 
"  Thou  shalt  utterly  destroy  the  Hittites,  and  the 
Amorites,  the  Canaanites,  and  the  Perizzites,  the 
Hivites,  and  the  Jebusites,  as  Jehovah  thy  God 
hath  commanded  thee ;  that  they  teach  you  not  to 
do  after  all  their  abominations."  But,  says  the 
narrator,  the  contrary  took  place ;  Israel  dwells 
amontr  them,  anil  is  consequently,  as  Moses  fore- 
told, initiated  into  the  sins  of  its  neighbors.  Hence, 
just  as  in  that  passage,  so  here  also,  only  six  nations 
are  named.  At  Deut.  vii.  1  the  Girgashiles  are 
added.  The  most  complete  catalogue  of  the  nations 
of  Canaan  is  given  in  Gen.  x.  15  If.  Another  one, 
essentially  different,  is  found  Gen.  xv.  19-21 .  Here, 
the  writer  does  not  intend  to  give  a  catalogue  ;  he 
names  the  nations  only  by  way  of  reproducing  the 
words  of  Moses,  and  of  manifesting  their  truth- 
fulness. 

Vers.  6,  7.     And  they  took  their  daughters. 

Precisely  in  this  consisted  the  "  covenant  "  (n",~;5) 
which  they  were  not  to  make  with  them.  The 
reference  here  is  especially  to  Deut.  vii.  2  ft*. : 
"  Thou  shalt  make  no  covenant  with  them.  And 
thou  shalt  not  make  marriages  with  them  ;  thy 
daughter  thou  shalt  not  give  unto  his  son,  nor  his 
daughter  shalt  thou  take  unto  thy  son.  For  it 
would  turn  away  thy  child  from  me,  and  they  will 
serve  false  gods."  All  this  has  here  come  to  pass. 
We  read  the  consequence  of  intermarriage  in  the 
words :  "  and  they  served  their  gods."  The  same 
passage  (Deut.  vii.  5)  proceeds  :  "  Ye  shall  destroy 
their  altars,  and  break  down  their  images,  and  cut 
down  their  Asheroth."  But  now  Israel  served 
"  Baalim  and  Asheroth."  It  bent  the  knee  before 
the  altars  of  Baal  and  the  idols  of  Astarte.  Ashe- 
rah  (see  below,  on  ch.  vi.  25)  is  the  idol  through 
which  Astarte  was  worshipped.  The  altar  was 
especially  consecrated  to  Baal,  the  pillar  or  tree- 
idol  to  her.  Hence  the  Baalim  and  Asheroth  of 
this  passage  answer  perfectly  to  the  Baal  and  Ash- 
taroth  of  ch.  ii.  13.     Instead  of  destroying,  Israel 

served  them,  "Q^  is  to  render  bodily  and  per- 
sonal service.  It  is  not  a  matter  of  thought  or 
opinion  merely.  He  who  serves,  serves  with  his 
bodv,  —  he  kneels,  offers,  prays.  The  ancient  trans- 
lators are  therefore  right  in  generally  rendering 
it  by  Keirovpyelf.  Among  the  Hellenes,  liturgy 
(\eirovoyia)  meant  service  which,  as  Biickh  shows, 
differed  from  all  other  obligations  precisely  in  this, 
that  it  was  to  be  rendered  personally.  Hence,  also, 
liturgy,   in   its   ecclesiastical   sense,   corresponded 

perfectly  with  abodah  (51125),  and  was  rightly 
used  to  denote  the  acts  of  divine  service.  Now, 
when  in  this  way  Israel  performed  liturgy  before 
idol   images,  that  took  place  which  Deut.  vii.  4 

1  [The  "  Crime-committing  (Jrevelndc)  Chushan."  See 
Bertheau  in  loc.  —  Tb.] 

1  Joeephus  has  \ovtrip9(K-  On  other  readings  see  Haver 
lamp,  ad  Josh.,  i.  239,  not.  x. 

I  The  opinion  of  Bertheau  that  the  prophet  alludes  to  our 


foretold  :  "  the  anger  of  the  Lord  was  kindled.' 
Whenever  Israel,  the  people  called  to  be  free,  falls 
into  servitude,  it  is  in  consequence  of  the  anger  of 
God.  It  is  free  only  while  it  holds  fast  to  its 
God.  When  it  apostatizes  from  the  God  of  free- 
dom, He  gives  it  up  to  tyrants,  as  one  gives  up  a 

slave   ("13??). 

Ver.  8.  He  gave  them  up  into  the  hand  of 
Chushan-rishathaim.  The  explanation  of  Risha- 
thaim,  adopted  by  Bertheau,  which  derives  it  froir 

^'^~!i  and  gives  it  the  sense  of  "  double  injustice ' 
or  "  outrage,"  is  not  to  be  thought  of.  To  sa» 
nothing  of  its  peculiar  form,  there  is  no  reason 
whatever  why  this  title  should  be  given  to  Chushan 
and  not  to  the  other  tyrants  over  Israel.  Had  ii 
been  intended  to  describe  him  as  peculiarly  wicked 

he  would  have  been  called  ^~^<  as  in  the  anal- 
ogous case  of  Hainan  (Esth.  vii.  6).  The  Midrash 
alone  attempts  an  explanation,  and  makes  Risha- 
thaim  to  mean  Lahan.  The  "  double  sin  "  is,  that 
Aram  (of  which,  in  the  spirit  of  the  Midrash, 
Laban  is  the  representative)  formerly  injured  Ja- 
cob, and  now  injures  his  descendants  (cf.  Jalkut, 
Judges,  n.  41).  The  renderings  of  the  Targum 
and  Peshito  1  sprang  from  this  interpretation.  Paul 
of  Tela,  on  the  other  hand,  follows  the  Septnagint, 
which  has  xov(TaP(Ta^a^lJ-  *  he,  and  others  of  later 
date,  write  Xovoav  PeaaBdw/ji  (ed.  Rordam,  p.  74). 
(Syncellus,  ed.  Bonn.  i.  285,  has  xovn'aP'ra^tJ-~) 
Rishathaim  is  manifestly  a  proper  name,  and  forms 
the  complement  of  Chushan,  which  does  not  con- 
ceal its  national  derivation.  At  all  events,  at  Hab. 
iii.  7,3  where  it  stands  parallel  with  Midian,  it  is 
used  to  designate  nationality.'  Now,  ancient  Per- 
sian tradition,  as  found  in  the  Schahnameh  of  Fir- 
dousi,  contains  reminiscences  of  warlike  expedi- 
tions from  the  centre  of  Iran  against  the  West. 

One  of  the  three  sons  of  Feridoun.  Selm  (C7t£7), 
is  lord  of  the  territories  west  of  the  Euphrates.  The 
nations  of  those  countries  are  hostile  to  Iran.  Men- 
tion is  also  made  of  assistance  from  Gangi  Jehocht 
(as  Jerusalem  is  several  times  designated)  in  a  war 
against  Iran  (cf.  Schack,  Heldens.  des  Firdusi,  p. 
160).     The   Iranian   heroes,   on   the  other  hand, 

Sam,  Zal  (  'NT),  and  Rnstem,  who  carry  on  the 
wars  of  the  kings,  east  and  west,  are  from  Sedjes- 
tan.  Sedjestan,  whose  inhabitants  under  the  Sas- 
sanides  also  formed  the  nucleus  of  the  army  (cf. 
Lassen.  Zndische  Altertli.  ii.  363),  derives  its  name 
from  the  Sacce  (Sacastene).  The  name  Sacae, 
however,  is  itself  only  a  general  ethnographic  term, 
answering  to  the  term  Scythians,  and  compre- 
hended all  those  powerful  nations,  addicted  to 
horsemanship  and  the  chase,  who  made  themselves 
famous  as  warriors  and  conquerors  in  the  regions 
east  and  west  of  the  Tigris.  All  Scythians,  says 
Herodotus,  are  called  Sacse  by  the  Persians.  The 
term  Cossseans  was  evidently  of  similar  compre- 
hensiveness. As  at  this  day  Segestan  (or  Seistan) 
is  still  named  after  the  Saca?,  so  Khuzistan  after 
the  Cossseans  (cf.  Mannert,  v.  2,  495).  Moses 
Chorenensis  derives  the  Parthians  from  the  land 
of  Chushan  (ed.  Florival,  i.  308-311).  In  the 
Naklishi  Rustam  inscription  (ver.  30)  we  read  of 
Khushiya,  which  certainly  appears  more  suggestive 
of  Cossan,  as  Lassen  interprets,  than  of  Gaud*,  as 

passage,  is  already  found  in  the  older  Jewish  expositors 
From  any  objective,  scientific  point  of  view,  this  view  can 
scarcely  be  concurred  in. 

4  [That  is  to  say.  the  term  expresses  ethnologic*  no* 
local  relations  —  Ta.] 


CHAPTER   III.    5-11. 


69 


Benfe  -  explains  (Die  Pers.  Keilinschr.,  p.  60).  That 
they  t.-e  quite  like  the  Parthians,  Scythians,  Sacs,  j 
in  the  use  of  the  bow  and  the  practice  of  pillage 
and  the  chase,  is  sufficiently  shown  by  the  passage 
of  Strabo  (ed.  Paris,  p.  449,  lib.  xi.  13,  6).  Like! 
Nimrod  (Gen.  x.  8),  all  these  nations,  and  also  the 
princes  of  the  Sacae,  Sara,  Zal,  and  Rustem,  are 
represented  as  heroes  and  hunters.  Nimrod  de- 
scends from  Cush,  and  rules  at  the  rivers.  So  here 
also  Cush  is  a  general  term  for  a  widely-diffused 
family  of  nations.  It  does  not  indicate  their  dwell- 
ing-place, but  their  mode  of  life  and  general  char- 
acteristics ]  Even  the  reference  in  the  name  of  this 
Chushan  to  darkness  of  complexion  is  not  to  be 
overlooked.  A  centaur  (horseman)  is  with  Hesiod 
{Scut.  Here.  185)  an  asbolos.  "Asbolos,"  says 
Enpolemus  (in  Euseb.,  Prcep.  Ev.  ix.  17  ;  cf.  Nie- 
bulir,  Assurund  Babel,  p.  262,  note  2),  is  translated 
XOV/J.S  by  the  Hellenes.  The  second  Chaldee  king 
is  called  Chomasbelos  by  Berosus  (Fragmenta, 
ed.  Midler,  Paris,  p.  503  ;  Niebuhr,  p.  490 ;  Syn- 
ceJlus,  i.  147,  ed.  Bonn)  ;  while  in  one  passage 
(Lam.  iv.  8)  the  LXX.  translate  shechor,  "  black," 
by  a.a&6\Ti.  Syncellus  is  therefore  improperly  cen- 
sured by  Niebuhr  for  comparing  Evechios,  and  not 
the  son  of  Chomasbelos,  with  Nimrod.  He  could 
compare  none  but  the  first  king  with  him  who  was 
likewise  held  to  be  the  first.  Accordingly,  it  can- 
not appear  surprising  that  kings  and  heroes  beyond 

the  Euphrates  are  named  l^S,  "Chushan."2 
One  of  the  most  famous  of  the  primitive  kings  of 
Iran  was  named  271S3  "O,  Kai  Kaous.  Persian 
tradition  tells  of  wars  and  conquests  which  he 
carried  on  in  Mesi,  Sham,  and  Rum,  i.  e.  Egypt, 
Syria,  and  Asia  Minor  (cf.  Herbelot,  Or.  Bibl.  ii. 
59).  They  also  relate  misfortunes  endured  by 
him.  In  his  wars  in  the  West,3  he  was  defeated 
and  taken  prisoner.     His  hero  and  deliverer  was 

always  Rustem  (Oi~lttn  or  Ej"ID~!,  also  CntOV), 

DnntCP,  cf.  Vullers,  Lex.  Pers.  ii.  32).  Now, 
since  it  is  obviously  proper  to  compare  these  names 
with  DVirttn  limr,  «  Chushan-rishathaim  " 
(for  the  y  as  well  as  the  pointing  of  the  Masora 

dates  from  the  Rabbinic  Midrash),  there  is  nothing 
to  oppose  the  idea  that  the  celebrated  Rustem  of  the 
East,  the  hero  of  Kaous,  whom  Moses  Chorenensis 
calls  the  Saces,  is  actually  mentioned  here.  It 
would  enhance  the  interest  of  the  narrative  to  find 
the  hero  of  the  Iranian  world  brought  upon  the 
scene  of  our  history.  Profane  history  would  here, 
as  so  frequently  elsewhere,  receive  valuable  illus- 
tration from  Scripture.  An  historical  period  would 
be  approximately  gained  for  Kai  Kaous.  On  the 
other  hand,  such  conflicts  were  sufficiently  memo- 
rable for  Israel  to  serve  as  testimonies  first  of  God's 
anger,  and  then  of  salvation  wrought  out  by  Him. 

And  they  served  Chushan-rishathaim,  :n?5*  V 

God  is  served  with  sacrifices ;  human  lords  with 

tribute  (cf.  ver.   15).     Hence   the  expression  D" 

1  We  cannot  enter  here  on  a  full  illustration  of  the  gene- 
alogy of  Cush,  as  given  Gen.  x.  For  some  excellent  remarks 
lee  Knobel  Die  ethnogr.  Tqfel,  p.  251-  Where  he  read  Cush, 
b  Wagenseil's  edition  of  Petachia,  Carmoly's  edition,  prob- 
ably less  correctly,  has  Acco.     Where  Benjamin  of  Tudela, 

Mi.  Asher,  p.  83,  has  fTlS,  other  manuscripts  have  Ci>:13. 
"lush  (Ezek.  xxxviii.  5)  may  also  pass  for  the  African. 


ISII?,  when  a  people  became  tributary.  The 
"  eight  years  "  are  considered  in  the  introductorj 
section  on  the  Chronology  of  the  Book. 

Ver.  9.     And  the    sons  of  Israel  cried  unto 

Jehovah.  p??J  is  the  anxious  cry  of  distress.  So 
cried  they  in  Egypt  by  reason  of  their  heavy  ser- 
vice (Ex.  ii.  23).  They  cry  to  God,  as  children  to 
their  father.  In  his  compassion,  He  hears  them. 
However,   Jeremiah    (xi.    11)    warns    the   people 

against  that  time  "  when  they  shall  cry  0P5' V 
unto  God,  but  he  will  not  hearken  unto  them." 

And  He  delivered  them  through  Othniel  the 
son  of  Kenaz.  The  Septuagint  gives  his  name 
as  Vo6ot>ir)A,  while  Josephus  has  'OoWtjAos.  Jerome 
(De  Nominibus,  ed.  Migne,  p.  809)  has  Athaniel, 
which  he  translates  "  my  time  of  God  "  (tempus 
meum  Dei).  This  is  also  the  translation  of  Leusden 
in  his  Onomasticon,  who  however  unnecessarily  dis- 
tinguishes between  a  Gothoniel  (I  Chron.  xxvii. 
15)  and  Othniel.  Gesenius  derives  the  name  from 
the  Arabic,  and  says  it  means  "  lion  of  God." 
How  carefully  Josephus  follows  ancient  exegesis, 
appears  from  his  inserting  the  story  of  Othniel 
only  after  the  abominations  of  Gibeah  (ch.  xix.) 
and"  those  of  the  tribe  of  Dan  (ch.  xviii.)  ;  for  these 
occurrences  were  regarded  as  belonging  to  the  time 
of  servitude  under  Chushan  (Jaucut,  Judges  n. 
41).  But  his  anxiety  to  avoid  every  appearance 
of  improbability  does  not  allow  him  to  call  Othniel 
the  brother  of  Caleb.  He  speaks  of  him  as  "t7jj 
'loiiSa  (puAijs  tis,  one  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  "  (Ant. 
v.  3,  3)  ;  for  he  fears  lest  the  Greek  reader  should 
take  offense  at  finding  Othniel  still  young  and  vig- 
orous enough  to  achieve  victory  in  the  field,  and 
render  forty  years'  service  as  Judge.  But  the  nar 
rator  adds  emphatically,  "  the  younger  brother  of 
Caleb,"  — in  order  to  leave  no  doubt  that  the  con- 
queror of  Kirjath-sepher  and  the  victor  over  Aram 
were  one  and  the  same  person.  Nor  is  there  any 
foundation  for  the  scrupulosity  of  Josephus.  In 
Israel  the  men  capable  of  bearing  arms  were 
enrolled  upon  the  completion  of  their  twentieth 
year  (Num.  xxvi.  2,  seq.).  Now,  if  Othniel  was 
twenty-five  years  of  age  when  he  conquered  Kir- 
jath-sepher, and  if  after  that  a  period  of  twenty 
years  elapsed,  during  which  a  new  generation  grew 
up,  he  would  be  fifty-three  years  of  age  when  as 
hero  and  conqueror  he  assumed  the  judicial  office, 
—  a  supposition  altogether  natural  and  probable. 
Caleb  in  his  eighty-fifth  year  still  considered  him- 
self fully  able  to  take  the  field.  Besides,  it  is  con- 
sonant with  the  spirit  which  animates  the  history 
here  narrated,  that  it  is  Othniel  who  appears  as 
the  first  Shophet.  Not  merely  because  of  the  hero- 
ism which  he  displayed  before  Kirjath-sepher;  but 
a  new  dignity  like  this  of  Judge  is  easily  attracted  to 
one  who  is  already  in  possession  of  a  certain  author- 
ity, which  was  evidently  the  case  with  Othniel.  He 
was  one  of  those  who,  in  part  at  least,  had  shared 
the  wars  with  Canaan.  He  was  the  brother  and 
son-in-law  of  the  celebrated  Caleb,  and  hence  a 
head  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  to  which  in  this  matter 

2  One  of  the  worst  enemies  of  Kai  Kaous  was  Deo  Send, 
t.  e.  the  White  Foe.  At  the  birth  of  Rustem's  father,  Zal, 
it  was  considered  a  misfortune  that  his  head  was  white.  Ht 
was  therefore  exposed  (cf.  Schack.  Firdusi,  p.  176). 

8  Some  call  him  ruler  of  Arabia,  others  of  Syria.  CI 
Mjk-Colm,  Hist,  of  Persia,  i.  27. 


70 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


1I90  the  initiative  belongs.  Once  it  was  asked, 
"  Who  shall  first  go  up  1 "  Judah  was  the  tribe 
selected  by  the  response.  The  first  Judge  whom 
God  appointed,  must  appear  in  Judah.  That  tribe 
still  had  strength  and  energy ;  there  the  memory 
of  former  deeds  achieved  by  faith  was  still  cher- 
ished among  the  people  (cf.'  Shemoth  Rabba,  §  48, 
p.  144  a). 

Ver.  1 0.  And  the  spirit  of  Jehovah  was  upon 
him.  The  spirit  of  faith,  of  trust  in  God,  of  enthu- 
siasm. It  is  the  same  spirit  which  God  bestows 
upon  the  seventy  also,  who  are  to  assist  Moses 
(Num.  xi.  25).  It  was  on  that  occasion  that  Moses 
exclaimed,  "  Would  God  that  all  the  Lord's  people 
were  prophets,  and  that  the  Lord  would  put  his 
Spirit  upon  them."  In  this  spirit,  Moses  and 
Joshua  performed  their  great  deeds.  In  this  spirit, 
Joshua  and  Caleb  knew  no  fear  when  they  explored 
the  land.  In  this  spirit,  the  spirit  of  obedience, 
which  in  faith  performs  the  law,  becomes  a  spirit 
of  power.  Of  those  seventy  we  are  told  (Num.  xi. 
25),  that  when  they  had  received  the  Spirit  of  God, 
they  prophesied.  The  Targum  therefore  trans- 
lates, both  there  and  here,  HS'Oa  PITH,  Spirit  of 
Prophecy.  It  does  this,  however,  in  the  case  of  no 
Judge  but  Othniel.  For  although  the  HiiT}  C^l 
is  also  spoken  of  in  connection  with  Gideon,  Jeph- 
thah,  and  Samson,  it  merely  gives  S^SS  TVH 
in  those  cases,  Spirit  of  heroism  (ch.  vi.  34 ;  xi. 
29  ;  xiii.  25).  The  first  ground  of  this  distinction 
conferred  on  Othniel,  is  the  irreproachable  charac- 
ter of  his  rule.  No  tragic  shadow  lies  on  his  life, 
as  on  the  lives  of  the  other  heroes.  To  this  must 
be  added  the  ancient  interpretation,  already  alluded 
to  above  (p.  35,  note  2),  which  identified  Othniel 
with  Jabez  (1  Chron.  iv.  10),  and  regarded  him  as 
a  pious  teacher  of  the  law.  They  said  concerning 
him,  that  his  sun  arose  when  Joshua's  went  down 
(Bereshith  Rabba,  §  58,  p.  51  b)  They  applied  to 
him  the  verse  in  Canticles  (iv.  7)  :  "  Thou  art  all 
fair,  there  is  no  spot  in  thee"  (Shir  ha-Shirim 
Rabba,  on  the  passage,  ed.  Amsterd.  p.  17  c.).1 

And  he  judged  Israel.  He  judged  Israel  before 
he  went  forth  to  war.   It  has  already  been  remarked 

above,  that  t2?C7    means  to  judge  in  the  name  of 

1  [Km :  ,r  The  Spirit  of  God  is  the  spiritual  life-princi- 
ple in  the  world  of  nature  and  of  mankind  :  and  in  man  it 
Is  the  principle  as  well  of  the  natural  life  received  by  birth, 
as  of  the  spiritual  life  received  through  the  new  birth,  cf. 
Auberlen,  Gfist  des  Menschen,  in  Herzog's  Realencykl.,  iv. 
731-  In  this  sense,  the  expression  '  Spirit  of  Elohim  ' 
alternates  with  f  Spirit  of  Jehovah,'  as  already  in  Gen.  i.  2, 
compared  with  vi.  3,  and  so  on  in  all  the  books  of  the  0.  T., 
with  this  difference,  however,  that  whereas  '  Spirit  of  Elo- 
him '  designates  the  Divine  Spirit  only  in  general,  on  the 
side  of  its  supernatural  causality  and  power,  c  Spirit  of  Je- 
hovah '  presents  it  on  the  side  of  its  historical  operation  on 
the  world  and  human  life,  in  the  interests  of  salvation.  In 
its  operations,  however,  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  manifests 
itself  as  the  Spirit  of  Wisdom  and  Understanding,  of  Coun- 
cil and  Strength,  of  Knowledge  and  the  Fear  of  the  Lord 
jlsa.  xi.  2).  The  impartation  of  this  spirit  in  the  0.  T-, 
^kes  the  form  for  the  most  part  of  an  extraordinary,  super- 
natural influence  exerted  over  the  human  spirit.  The  usual 
expression  for  this  is,  ( the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  (or  Elohim) 

V7}?  ^H/tH,  came  upon  him  ; '  so  here  and  in  xi.  29  ;  1 
Sam.  xix.20,  23 ;  2  Chron.  xx.  14  ;  Num.  xxiv.  2.  With 
this,  however,  the  expressions  VvJJ  (HPO^)  PO^Jni, 
th.  xiv.  6,  19;  xv.  14;  1  Sam.  x.  10;  xi.  6;  xvi.  13,  and 
Z  nS  nttJnb,  the  Spirit  >  put  on  (clothed)  the  person,' 
:h.  vi'34;  1  L'urnn.  xii    IS;  2  Chron.  xxiv.  20.  alternate; 


the  law.  The  Judge  enforces  the  law ;  he  pun 
ishes  sin,  abolishes  wrong.  If  Israel  is  to  be  victo> 
rious,  it  is  not  enough  to  "  cry  unto  the  Lord ; " 

the  authority  of  the  law  (I32tt.'Q)  must  be  recog- 
nized. "  These  are  the  E^Stl'D  (judgments) 
which  thou  shalt  set  before  them,"  is  the  order, 
Ex.  xxi.  1 .  Israel  must  become  conscious  of  Go,' 
and  duty.  At  that  point  Othniel's  judicial  activitj 
began.  This  was  what  he  taught  them  for  the 
future.  Not  till  that  is  accomplished  can  war  be 
successfully  undertaken. 

Ver.  11.  And  the  land  rested.  Ef2^  <ioes 
not  occur  in  the  Pentateuch.  It  signifies  that  de- 
sirable condition  of  quiet  in  which  the  people, 
troubled  by  neither  external  nor  internal  foes,  en- 
joys its  possessions,  — when  the  tumults  of  war  are 
hushed,  and  peaceful  calm  pervades  the  land. 
Such  rest  is  found  in  Israel,  when  the  people  obe- 
diently serve  their  God.  "  The  service  of  right- 
eousness   (says    Isaiah,   ch.   xxxii.    17),    is    n-st 

(^Wr7)  and  security  forever."  Jeremiah  (ch. 
xxx.  10)  announces  that  when  Israel  shall  be 
redeemed,  Jacob  shall  rest  and  be  free  from  care 

(]2^t?}  ^ii1?).  The  present  rest,  alas  endured 
only  until  Othniel  died.  When  he  went  home,  his 
authority  ceased,  and  peace  departed. 

HOMILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

Othniel  the  Judge  without  offense  and  without 
sorrow.  The  first  Judge  comes  out  of  Judah. 
Here  also  that  tribe  leads.  On  all  succeeding 
Judges  there  rests,  notwithstanding  their  victories, 
the  shadow  of  error,  of  grief,  or  of  a  tragic  end. 
They  were  all  of  other  tribes  ;  only  Othniel,  out  of 
Judah,  saved  and  died  without  blemish  and  with- 
out sorrow.  To  him  no  abnormity  of  Jewish  his- 
tory attaches.  He  was  the  appointed  hero  of  his 
time.  The  relative  and  son-in-law  of  Caleb  con- 
tinued the  line  of  heroes  which  begins  in  the  desert. 
For  that  very  reason  he  was  free  from  many  temp- 
tations and  irregularities.  Men  were  accustomed 
to  see  Judah  and  the  family  of  Caleb  take  the 
lead.     Other  Judges  had  first  to  struggle  for  that 

the  former  of  which  characterizes  the  influence  of  the  Divine 
Spirit  as  one  which  overpowers  the  resistance  of  the  natural 

will  [the  verb  Plyti,  which  in  this  connection  the  E.  V. 
sometimes  renders  '  to  come  upon  mightily,'  as  in  Judges 
xiv.  6,  sometimes  merely  '  to  come  upon,'  as  in  ver.  19  of 
the  same  chapter,  properly  signifies  ( to  cleave,  to  cut,  to 
break  through  '  —  Te.],  while  the  latter  represents  it  as  a 
power  which  envelopes  and  covers  man.  They  who  receive 
aud  possess  this  spirit  are  thereby  endowed  with  power  to 
perform  wonderful  deeds.  Commonly,  the  Spirit  that  has 
come  upon  them  manifests  itself  in  the  ability  to  prophesy, 
but  also  in  the  power  to  perform  wonders  or  exploits  tran 
scending  the  natural  courage  and  strength  of  man.  The 
latter  was  especially  the  case  with  the  Judges.  Hence  the 
Targum  already,  on  ch.  vi.  34,  explains  the  r  Spirit  of  Jeho- 
vah '  as  the  c  Spirit  of  Strength  from  the  Lord,'  while  on 
the  other  hand  in  our  passage  it  erroneously  thinks  of  the 
1  Spirit  of  Prophecy.'  Kimchi  also  understands  here  the 
1  spiritum  fortiludinis,  quo  excitatus,  amolo  omni  nietu,  bel~ 
linn  adverstis  Cuschanem  susceperit.1  It  is  however  scarcely 
proper  so  to  separate  the  various  powers  of  the  Divine 
Spirit,  as  to  take  it  in  its  operation  on  the  Judges,  merely  as 
the  Spirit  of  Strength  and  Valor.  The  Judges  not  only  fought 
the  enemy  courageously  and  victoriously,  but  also  judge  1  the 
people,  for  which  the  Spirit  of  Wisdom  and  Understan  ling, 
and  restrained  idolatry  (ch.  ii-  18  seq.),  for  which  the  Spirit  o( 
Knowledge  and  of  the  Fear  of  the  Lord,  was  required."  —  Ta.j 


CHAPTER   III.    12-30. 


1 


wthority  which  Othniel  already  possessed.  He 
who  is  exempt  from  this  necessity,  escapes  many  a 
temptation. 

Thus  Othniel  is  a  type  of  sons  descended  from 
good  families,  and  of  inherited  position.  From  him 
such  may  learn  their  duty  to  use  life  and  strength 
for  their  country.  His  life  shows  that  to  lead  and 
judge  is  easier  for  them  than  for  others.  There  are 
many  "  Caleb-relatives  "  who  squander  the  glory 
of  their  name ;  but  yet  there  have  never  been 
wanting  Christians  who,  historically  among  the 
first  men  of  their  country,  have  borne  aloft  the 
banner  of  truth.  Joachim  von  Alvensleben  com- 
posed his  Confession  of  the  Christian  Faith  (printed 
at  Stendal,  1854),  that  he  might  acquit  himself  of 
his  "  paternal  office "  to  his  family,  warn  them 
faithfully,  and  preserve  them  from  apostasy  ;  so 
that  Martin  Chemnitz  prays  the  "  good  and  kind 
God  to  preserve  hoc  sacrum  depositum  in  its  purity, 
everywhere  in  his  church,  and  especially  in  nobili 
hoc  familia  "  (Brunswick,  March  1,1566).  The 
spirit  of  Othniel  clearly  manifested  itself  in  Zinzen- 
iorf ;  and  he  rendered  useful  service  not  only  in 
spite  of  his  distinguished  name,  but  especially  in 
his  own  day,  because  he  bore  it.  His  life,  while  it 
testifies  that  in  the  spirit  of  the  gospel  everything 
can  be  turned  into  a  special  blessing,  shows  also 
that  no  gift  of  Providence  is  to  be  suppressed,  — 
least  of  all,  one's  family  and  origin  (cf.  Otto 
Strauss :    Zinzendorf,  Leben  und  Auswahl    seiner 


Schriften,  etc.,  iv.  147,  etc.).  This  spirit  of  Othniel 
was  in  the  Minister  Von  Pfeil,  in  his  life  and  work, 
confessing  and  praying.     In  his  own  words  :  — 

"  EDigbt  of  heaven  Jesus  made  me, 

Touched  me  with  the  Spirit's  sword, 
When  the  Spirit's  voice  declared  me 
Free  forever  to  the  Lord." 

Starke  :  What  great  depravity  of  the  human 
heart,  that  men  so  easily  forget  the  true  God  whom 
they  have  known,  and  voluntarily  accept  and 
honor  strange  gods,  whom  neither  they  nor  their 
fathers  knew.  The  Same  :  God  is  at  no  loss  for 
means ;  He  prescribes  bounds  to  the  aggressions  of 
the  enemy.  But  in  the  spiritual  warfare  also  men 
must  be  bold.  We  do  not  conquer  by  sitting  -till. 
Lisco :  The  spirit  of  the  Lord  is  the  originator 
of  everything  good  and  of  all  great  achievements. 

[Henky  :  Affliction  makes  those  cry  to  God 
with  importunity,  who  before  would  scarcely  speak 
to  him.  The  same:  Othniel  first  judged  Israel, 
reproved  them,  called  them  to  an  account  fur  their 
sins,  and  reformed  them,  and  then  went  out  to  war  ; 
that  was  the  right  method.  Let  sin  at  home  be 
conquered,  that  worst  of  enemies,  and  then  ene- 
mies abroad  will  be  more  easily  dealt  with.  Bishop 
Hall:  Othniel's  life  and  Israel's  innocence  and 
peace  ended  together.  How  powerful  the  presence 
of  one  good  man  is  in  a  church  or  state,  is  best 
found  in  his  death.  —  Tr.] 


SECOND  SECTION. 


IKS    SERVITUDE  TO  EGLON,  KING  OP  MOAB.    EHUD,  THE  JUDGE  WITH  THE  DOUBLE-EDGED 
DAGGEB.   SHAMGAB,  THE  DELIVEBEB  WITH  THE  OX-GOAD. 


Eglon,  King  of  Moab,  reduces  Israel  to  servitude,  and  seizes  on  the  City  of  Palms  . 
are  delivered  by  Ehud,  who  destroys  the  oppressor. 

Chapter  III.  12-30. 


they 


12  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  did  evil  again  [continued  to  do  evil]  in  the 
sight  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  :  and  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  strengthened  [encouraged  >] 
Eglon  the  king  of  Moab   against   Israel,  because  they  had    done   [did]  evil  in  the 

13  sight  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah].  And  he  gathered  unto  him  [having  allied  himself  with]  the 
children   [sons]  of  Ammon  and  Amalek,  and  went   and   smote  Israel,  and   [they" 

14  possessed  [took  possession  of]  the  city  of  palm-trees.     So  [And]  the  children  [sons" 

15  of  Israel  served  Eglon  the  king  of  Moab  eighteen  years.  But  when  [And]  the  chil- 
dren [sons]  of  Israel  cried  unto  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  [and]  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  raised 
them  up  a  deliverer,  Ehud  the  sou  of  Gera,  a  Benjamite  [Ben-jemini].  a  man 
left-handed  [weak  2  of  his  right  hand]  :  and  by  him  the  children   [sons]  of  Israel 

16  sent  a  present  unto  Eglon  the  king  of  Moab.3  But  [And]  Ehud  made  him  a  dag 
ger  which  had  two  edges,  of  a  cubit  [gomed]  length  :  and  he  did  gird  it  under  his 

17  raiment  upon  his  right  thigh.     And  he  brought  the  present  unto  Eglon  king  of  Moab  : 

18  and  Eglon  was  a  very  fat  man.     And  when  he  had  made  an  end  to  offer  the  present. 

19  he  sent  away  [dismissed  4]  the  people  that  bare  the  present.  But  he  himself  turned 
again  [turned  back]  from  the  quarries  [Pesilim']  that  were  by  Gilgal,  and  said.  I 
have  a  secret  errand  6  unto  thee,  O  king  :  who  said,  Keep  [omit :  keep  ]   silence 


72  THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES 


20  And  [thereupon]  all  that  stood  by  him  went  out  from  him.  And  Ehud  came  [dre» 
near]  unto  him  ;  and  he  was  sitting  in  a  summer  parlour  [now  he,  i.  e.  the  king,  was  sitting 
in  the  upper  story  of  the  cooling-house 6],  which  he  had  for  himself  alone  [hit  private 
apartment]  :  and  Ehud  said,  I  have  a  message  from  God  [the  Deity]  unto  thee.     And 

21  [Then]  he  arose  out  of  his  seat.     And  [immediately]  Ehud  put  forth  his  left  hand,  and 

22  took  the  dagger  from  his  right  thigh,  and  thrust  it  into  his  belly  :  And  the  haft  alsc 
went  in  after  the  blade :  and  the  fat  closed  upon  [about]  the  blade,  so  that  he  could  not 
[for  he  did  not]  draw  the   dagger  out  of  his  belly  ;  and  the  dirt  [the  dagger7]  came 

23  out  [behind].  Then  [And]  Ehud  went  forth  through  the  porch  [went  upon  the 
balcony],  and  shut  the  doors  of  the  parlour  [upper  story]  upon  him  [after  him],  and 

24  locked  them.  When  he  was  gone  out.  his  [the  king's]  servants  came ;  and  when  they 
saw  that  [and  they  looked,  and]  behold,  the  doors  of  the  parlour  [upper  story]  were 
locked,  [and]   they  said,  Surely  [doubtless],   he  covereth  his  feet  in   his  summer- 

25  chamber  [chamber  of  the  cooling-house].     And  they  tarried  till  they  were  ashamed 

waited  very  long]  :  and  behold,  he  opened  not  [no  one  opened]  the  doors   of  the  parlour 
upper  story],  therefore  they  took  a  [the]  key  and  opened   them:  and   behold,  their 

26  lord  ivas  fallen  down  dead  on  the  earth.  And  [But]  Ehud  [had]  escaped  while 
they    tarried ;    and    [had    already]    passed    beyond    the    quarries  [_Pesilim~],    and 

27  [had]  escaped  unto  Seirath  [Seirah].  And  it  came  to  pass  when  he  was  come 
[when  he  arrived],  that  he  blew  a  [the]  trumpet  in  the  mountain  [mountains]  of 
Ephraim,  and  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel    went  down  with  him  from  the   mount 

28  [mountains],  and  he  before  them.  And  he  said  unto  them,  Follow  [Hasten]  after 
me :  for  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  hath  delivered  your  enemies  the  Moabites  into  your 
hand.     And  they  went  down  after  him,  and  took  the  fords  of  Jordan  toward  Moab, 

29  and  suffered  not  a  man  to  pass  over.  And  they  slew  [smote]  of  Moab  at  that  time 
about  ten  thousand  men,  all  lusty,8  and  all  men  of  valour  :  and   there  escaped  not  a 

30  man.  So  Moab  was  subdued  that  day  under  the  hand  of  Israel :  and  the  laud  had 
rest  four-score  years. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[V  Ver.  12.  —  p'TrPT  :  the  same  word  is  used  Ex.  iv.  21.  etc.,  Josh.  xi.  20;  but  is  here,  as  Bachmann  remarks,  to  be 
explained  not  by  those  passages,  but  by  Ezek.  xxx.  24.  It  implies  here  the  impartation  not  so  much  of  strength  as  cf 
the  consciousness  of  it.  —  Tr.  J 

[2  Ver.  15.  —  *"lt2M  :  Dr.  Cassel,  sckwark,  weak.  r(  Impeded  "  would  be  the  better  word.  Against  the  opinion  of 
some,  that  Ehud's  right  hand  was  either  lamed  or  mutilated.  Bachmann  quotes  the  remark  of  Schmid  that  it  would  have 
been  a  breach  of  decorum  to  send  such  a  physically  imperfect  person  on  an  embassy  to  the  king.     It  may  be  added  that 

this  explanation  of  ")t2M  is  at  all  events  not  to  be  thought  of  in  the  case  of  the  700  chosen  men  mentioned  in  ch.  XX. 
16  —  Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  15.  —  Dr.  Cassel  translates  this  clause:  "when  [aU  ;  i.  e.  Jehovah  raised  up  Ehud  as  a  deliverer,  when]  the 
sons  of  Israel  sent  a  present  by  him  to  Eglon,  the  king  of  Moab."  But  it  is  altogether  simpler  and  better  to  take  the 
clause  as  an  independent  progressive  sentence,  as  in  the  E.  V.     So  Bachmann  also.  —  Tr.] 

[4  Ver.  18.  —  rivCJ^  :  dismissed  them  by  accompanying  them  part  of  the  way  back,  cf.  Gen.  xii.  20 ;  xviii.  16 
etc.  —  Tr.] 

[5  Ver.  19.  —  "inD"ll^T  :  Dr.  Cassel  translates,  tr  a  secret  word."  But  u  errand  "  is  better  ;  because  like  """^T1. 
it  may  be  a  word  or  message,  or  it  may  be  a  commission  of  a  more  active  nature.  Bachmann  quotes  ChytrKus :  rem^ 
negoti  inn  secret  urn  habeo  apuil  te  agendum.     So,  he  goes  on  to  remark,  in  ver.  20        tT     ^S  2srT     S'~"^D7T,    is   not 

necessarily,  f  I  have  a  word  from  God  to  say  to  thee  ;'  but  may  mean,  f  I  have  a  commission  from  God  to  execute  to 
thee.'"  It  would  be  preferable,  therefore,  to  conform  the  English  Version  in  ver.  20  to  ver.  10,  rather  than  the  reverse. 
—  Tr.] 

[*3  Ver.  20.  —  The  rendering  given  above  is  Dr.  Cassel's,  except  that  he  puts  the  verb  l  2CT^)  in  (lie  pluperfect,  which 

can  scarcely  be  approved.     He  translates   rT"lp*?n    i"V^l?3    by    Obergeschoss    des    Kiihlhauses,  which  we   can    only 

represent  bv  the  awkward  phrase :   tf  upper  story  of  the  cooling-house."     It  would  be  better,  however,  to  take     H"^^ 

t  ■-  : 
as  containing  an  adjective  idea,  descriptive  of  the  'abjak  :  "  cool  upper  story."     Cf.  Bachmann.  — Tr.] 

[7  Ver.  22.  —  The  term  ^'OtP'HS   occurs  only  here,  and  is  of  exceedingly   doubtful  interpretation.     Bachmann  as 

■umes  that  the  St-S1  which  precedes  it  has  Ehud  for  its  subject,  and  then —  by  a  course  of  reasoning  far  too  length\ 

ind  intricate  to  be  here  discussed —  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  1i"ltt?*15  denotes  a  locality,  which  in  the  next  vers* 

H  more  definitely  indicated  by  ^"l^TDD.  The  latter  term,  he  thinks,  is  best  understood  "  ot  the  lattice-work  by 
which  the  roof  was  inclosed,  or  rather  of  the  inclosed  platform  of  the  roof  itself."  Accordingly  he  conceives  the  text 
to  sav  that  Ehud  issued  forth  from  Eglon's  private  apartment"  upon  the  flat  roof,  more  definitely  upou  the  incli  *ed  pUt 
*>rm  or  gallery    '  —  Tr.] 


CHAPTER   III.    12-30. 


73 


[8  Ter.  29.  —  Dr.  Cassel :  angesetune  Leule,  cf.  the  Commentary  ;  but  it  seems  better  to  hold  fast  to  me  E. ""»       The  «- 
ion  is  literally  :  ft  fat  men,"  :'.  e.  well-fed,  lusty  men,  of  great  physical  strength.     So  Bachmann  also.  —  T».] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  12-14.  And  Jehovah  encouraged  Eg- 
lon,  king  of  Moab.  The  second  attack  on  Israel 
came  likewise  from  the  east,  bnt  from  a  point  much 
nearer  home  than  that  from  which  the  first  by 
Aram  .tad  come.  A  warlike  prince  of  Moab  had 
formed  a  league  for  the  occasion  with  neighbors 
north  and  south  of  him.  For  the  sons  of  Amnion 
dwelt  beyond  the  Jordan,  east  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
above  the  Moabites ;  while  the  hosts  of  Amalek 
roved  lower  down;  to  the  southwest  of  Moab. 
Hitherto  no  actual  conflict  had  occurred  between 
Moab  and  Israel.  But  the  order  that  "  no  Am- 
monite or  Moabite  shall  enter  into  the  congrega- 
tion of  Jehovah"  (Deut.  xxiii.  4  (3)),  sufficiently 
marks  the  antagonism  that  existed  between  them. 
The  Moabites  longed  for  the  excellent  oasis  of  the 
City  of  Palms.  Jericho,  it  is  true,  was  destroyed  ; 
but  the  indestructible  wealth  of  its  splendid  .-itv 
attracted  them.  They  surprised  Israel,  now  be- 
come dull  and  incapable.  Neither  in  the  land  of 
Benjamin,  where  the  battle  was  fought,  nor  from 
the  neighboring  tribes  of  Judab  and  Ephraim,  did 
they  meet  with  any  energetic  resistance.  Prom 
the  words  "  and  they  took  possession  of,"  in  con- 
nection with  the  following  narrative,  it  appears 
that  Eglon  had  fixed  his  residence  in  the  City  of 
Palms.1  This  renders  it  probable  that  Eglon  was 
not  the  king  of  all  Moab,  (whose  principal  seat 
was  in  Rabbath  Moab.)  but  a  Moabitish  chieftain 
whom  this  successful  expedition  placed  in  posses 
sion  of  this  fair  territory  west  of  the  Jordan. 

Ver.  15.  And  Jehovah  raised  them  up  a 
deliverer,  Ehud,  the  son  of  Grera,  a  Ben-jemini, 

a  man  weak   of   his   right  hand.     "WHS  .    for 

which  the  LXX.  read  THS,  Aod  (Jerome  has 
Eud) .  It  seems  to  me  that  the  older  derivation  of 
this  name  from  TlTT,  giving  it  the  sense  of  "  one 
who  praises,"  or  "one  who  is  praised"  (gloriam 
aedpiens,  Jerome),  is  to  be  unqualifiedly  preferred 
to  the  later,  proposed  by  Fiirst,  from  a  conjectural 

roo»    "fS.     "HnS   is  related  to    Tin,  TTTT,  as 

'H£>  to  be  bright,  is  to  ^H,  V?n,  and  ]ilHS 

(Arabic,  Hdrun)  to  "IH,  "H^.    Elsewhere  I  have 

already  compared  hod  with  the  Sanskrit  vad,  S5w 
ielSw,  litia,  and  the  Gothic  audags  (Irene,  p.  6 
note.)  At  all  events,  as  Ehud  belongs  to  hod,  so 
such  names  as  Audo,  Eudo,  Heudo,  seem  to  belong 
to  audags  (cf.  Forstemann,  Namenbuch,  i.  162,  391). 
He  was  a  Ben-jemini,  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin, 
as  the  Targum  expressly  adds.  When  the  son  of 
Jacob  was  born,  his  dying  mother  named  him 
Benoni,  "  son  of  my  sorrow ;  "  but  his  father,  by 
way  of  euphemism,  called  him  Ben-jamin,  "  son 
of  good  fortune"  (Gen.  xxxv.  18).  Jamin  came 
to  signify  "  good  fortune,"  only  because  it  desig- 
nated the  right  side.  The  inhabitants  of  the  holy 
land  had  the  sea  (jam-)  on  the  right,  hence  called 

1  [It  certainly  appears  that  he  had  done  so  temporarily, 
bat  by  no  means  that  he  had  done  so  permanently.  —  Tr.] 

2  The  importance  of  this  observation  has  been  overlooked 
with  reference  to  other  lands  as  well  as  Palestine.  The 
general  fact  that  the  sea-side  was  the  right  side,  has  been 
•distantly  ignored.  That  was  the  reason  why  Jacob  Grimm 
'.OescK.  dr  Deutschen  Sprache,  p.  990.  etc.)  failed  to  under- 
land  why  ancong  the  Indians,  Romans,  etc.,  the  south  side 


that  side  jamin,  literally,  sea-side  ;  and  the  high 
lands  of  Aram  (or  Sham,  cf.  Magyar,  Altherth.,  p 
228)  on  the  left,  hence  semol,  the  left,  from  Sam. 
Different  nations  derived  their  expressions  for  right 
and  left  from  conceptions  peculiar  to  themselves. 
Thus  8e£i6s  and  dexter  s  are  based  on  the  idea  of 
showing,  pointing,  with  the  right  hand  (Stim/vm) ; 
sinister,  from  sinus,  on  the  action  of  laying  the  right 
hand  on  the  side  of  the  heart-  The  left  hand  has 
everywhere  been  regarded  as  the  weaker,  which, 
properly  speaking,  did  not  meld  arms.  When 
oriental  custom  placed  the  stranger  on  the  left,  it 
assigned  him  the  seat  of  honor  in  so  far  as  the  left 
side  seemed  to  be  the  weaker  and  less  protected  (cf. 
Xenoph.  Cyrop,  viii.  4  ;  Meiners,  Veber  die  Versch. 
der  Menschennaturen,  ii.  588).  From  the  idea  of 
weakness,  sprang  such  terms  as  \at6s,  hevus,  Ger. 
link,  [Eng.  left],  because  that  side  is  harmless, 
smooth,  and  gentle  (cf.  Alios,  l<evis).  Hence  also 
the  custom  among  Asiatic  nations  of  inclining 
toward  the  left  side,  and  resting  on  the  left  hand, 
when  seated,  (Meiners,  iii.  213)  :  the  right  hand 
was  thus  left  free.  It  was  by  a  euphemism  that 
the  name  of  Jacob's  son  was  Ben-jamin.  Among 
the  Greeks  also  the  "  left "  was  euphemistically 
called  ibuivvfios,  good-omened,  because  it  was  wished 
to  avoid  the  ominous  apiaripSs.  A  similar  custom 
must  have  obtained  in  Israel,  since  just  in  the  tribe 
of  Benjamin  there  were,  as  we  are  informed  Judg. 
xx.  16,  large  numbers  of  men  who,  like  Ehud,  were 
ia'W  "P  "ItSN,  |.  e.  left-handed,  —  the  sons  of  the 
right  hand  being  thus  most  addicted  to  the  use  of 
the  left.  But  for  the  very  reason  that  it  seems  to 
have  been  a  habit  of  the  "tribe  to  use  the  left  hand, 

it  cannot  be  supposed  that  1t?S  is  meant  to  indi- 
cate lameness  of  the  right  hand.  The  LXX.  felt 
this  when  they  rendered  the  phrase  by  afi<piS4(ios, 
"  double  right-handed."  The  same  consideration 
influenced  those  more  recent  scholars  who  in- 
stanced (as  Serarius  already  did.  p.  84)  the  Ho- 
meric Asteropffius,  who  fought  with  both  hands. 
However,  this  also  contradicts  the  spirit  of  the  nar- 
rative, and,  as  the  peculiarity  occurs  only  in  Ben- 
jamin, the  name  as  well.  Those  Ben-jemini,  who, 
like  Ehud,  use  the  left  hand,  do  it  in  contrast  with 
others,  who  make  use  of  the  right  without  any 
lameness  in  the  left.  That  which  Stobajus  (Ec- 
lou<e  Physical,  ed.  Heeren,  i.  52,  992)  relates  of 
certain  African  nations,  might  also  be  said  of  the 
Benjamites  :  that  they  arc  "  good  and  for  the  most 
part  left-handed  fighters  (bpurTfpondxovs),  and  do 
with  the  left  hand  whatever  others  do  with  the 
right."  These  are  manifestly  the  same  tribes  of 
whom  Stephanus  of  Byzantium  (ed.  Westermann, 
p.  128)  speaks  as  an  Egyptian  people  near  Ethio- 
pia, and  whom  he  styles  'Evuvvfiirat  (thus  desig- 
nating  them,  like  Benjamin,  by  the  euphemistic 

term  for  left-handed).   Accordingly  "i3",Tp^  T  "IBM 

means  no  more  than  "  unpracticed,  weak,  awk 
ward,  with  the  right  hand,"  as  other  people  are 
with    the   left.     They  are   such   as   among   other 

of  the  mountains  was  the  right,  and  the  north  side  the  left. 
The  same  idea  prevailed  among  the  Greeks.  That  iu  Roman 
augury  rr  to  the  'eft "  was  more  favorable  than  (f  to  the 
right, "  originated  only  in  another  view  of  the  object  which 
was  supposed  to  produce  good  fortune.  The  s*«  lide  wai 
the  free  side. 

8  Cf.  Benfey,  Urieth.  Grammal.,  i.  240. 


74 


THE   BOOK   OF   JUDGES. 


nations  the  people  frequently  called  Linketatz,  Link- 
fuss  [literally,  "  left-paw,"  "  left-foot  "]  (Friseh,  i. 
816),  in  France  gauchier  [lit.  "left-hander";  cf. 
the  English  atck,  gmck,  and  their  derivative  forms] . 
It  is  remarkable  that  in  the  Roman  legend  the 
hero,  who,  like  Ehud,  undertakes  to  kill  the  enemy 
of  his  country,  is  also  named  Sesevola,  left-handed. 
The  traditional  explanation  that  he  was  so  named 
because  he  bunted  his  right  hand,  is  not  very 
suitable ;  he  should  in  that  case,  be  named  "  one- 
handed."  Still,  no  one  will  agree  with  Niebuhr 
(Rom.  Gesch.,  i.  569),  who,  following  Varro,  pro- 
posed an  altogether  different  derivation.  The  tra- 
dition must  refer  to  an  actually  left-handed  hero. 
Sc&vus,  says  Ulpian  (Diqestor.,  lib.  i.  tit.  1,  12,  3), 
does  not  apply  to  one  who  is  maimed ;  hence,  he 
who  cannot  move  the  right  hand  is  called  manctis- 
As  such  a  left-handed  person  we  are  to  consider 
Laius  (Aai'os),  the  father  of  CEdipus  (OiSiirous). 

Ver.  16.  And  Ehud  made  him  a  dagger 
[German :  Dolch]  which  had  two  edges,  a 
gorned  long.  The  word  dolch  [dagger,  dirk]  has 
passed  over  into  the  German,  from  the  Slavic,  since 
the  sixteenth  century,  and  was  not  yet  known  to 

Luther.1  It  answers  to  210  in  this  passage, 
better  than  "  sword "  would  do,  because  it  has 
become  quite  synonymous  with  stichdegen  (dirk  or 
poniard).  Oriental  daggers  have  always  been 
double-edged  and  short-handled  (ver.  22).  Gomed 
is  translated  o-mdafi-ri  by  the  Septuaginta.  Among 
the  Greeks,  the  o-iriSa^  was  half  an  ell,  i.e.  twelve 
digits  or  three  fourths  of  a  foot  (cf.  Biickh,  Sfetro- 
log.  Unters.,  p.  211),  With  this  measure,  gomed,  in 
its  general  sense  of  cubitus,  which  is  also  given  in 
the  garmida  of  the  Targum,  corresponds.  The 
dagger  of  Ehud  was  not  curved,  as  the  sicce  usually 
were  and  as  the  daggers  of  the  Bedouins  still  are 
(cf.  Jos.  Ant.  xx.  10).  Its  length  could  only  be 
such  as  was  consistent  with  concealment. 

And  girded  it  under  his  raiment.  "  To  the 
presence  of  Dionysius  the  Tyrant,  glided  Mceros, 
the  dagger  in  his  garment,"  sings  our  poet,-  and  is 
withal  perfectly  historical,  even  though  the  Fable 
(n.  257)  of  Hyginus  does  not  expressly  say  this. 
With  such  daggers  in  their  garments  the  Sicarii 
raged  among  the  crowds  at  the  fall  of  Jerusalem. 
Prudenlius  (Psychomachia,  689)  sings  of  Discordia : 
"  sicam  sub  veste  tegit!"  Kothari,  the  would-be 
murderer  of  the  Longobard  king  Luitprand,  wore 
coat  of  mail  and  a  dagger  beneath  his  clothing 
(I'aulus  Diaconus,  Hist.  Lomb.  vi.  37).  Ehud  had 
to  wear  the  dagger  on  his  right  side  because  he 
was  left-handed.  However,  among  German  war- 
riors who  were  not  left-handed,  the  dagger  was  also 
frequently  worn  on  the  right,  because  the  sword 
hung  on  the  left,  as  may  be  seen  in  old  pictures 
and  on  gravestones  (Klemm,  Waffen  una  Werk- 
zeuqe,  Leipzig,  1854,  p.  173). 

Ver.   17.     And  Eglon  was  a  very   fat   man. 

Considering  the  sense  of  ^12  wherever  it  occurs 
in  Scripture,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  is  in- 
tended here  to  express  the  corpulency  of  the  king. 
The  LXX.  in  giving  ao~reios,  follow  another  inter- 
pretation. They  do  not  (as  Bochart  thought, 
Phaleg,  p.  534)  take  it  as  descriptive  of  a  handsome 

1  This  is  the  opinion  of  Grimm  (Deutsrh.  Worlerb.,  ii. 
1222).  However,  the  view  of  Klemnt  {Wafftn  und  Werk- 
fuge,  p  172)  may  nevertheless  serve  So  find  the  original 
itymology  of  the  word.  [Luther  has  Sckwerl,  sword.  — 
H-l 

1  [Schiller,  in  his  ballad  entitled  Die  BUrgschaft.  —  Tb.] 


man,  nor  do  they  imagine  that  all  urbani,  on  ao 
count  of  their  comfortable  mode  of  living,  have  e 
tendency  to  become  fat  (cf.  Serarius,  p.  87) ;  but 
since  the  statement  "  and  Eglon  was  a  fat  man  "  h 
closely  connected  with  the  narrative  of  the  presen- 
tation of  the  gifts,  they  make  it  refer  to  the  manner 
in  which  the  king  received  the  presents.'*  'Ao-reios 
is  friendly,  accessible  (Plato,  Phced.,  116  b.).  In 
Egypt,  where  the  translators  lived,  it  was  probably 
still  a  matter  of  present  experience,  that  presenta 
tions  of  tribute  and  gifts  to  the  rulers  did  nol 
always  meet  with  a  gracious  reception. 

Ver.  18.  When  the  presentation  of  the 
present  was  over,  he  dismissed  the  people. 
Menschen  (Nou.  Test,  ex  Talin.,  p.  971)  very  prop- 
erly observes  that  2"]J?,  bere  employed  to  express 
the  presentation  of  gifts  to  a  king,  is  elsewhere  used 
to  denote  the  bringing  of  oblafVns  to  God,  hence 

?2"}|?,  offering.  It  was  not  lawful  to  appear  be- 
fore an  Asiatic  king  without  bringing  a  gift 4  ( Sen- 
eca, Ep.  xvii.) ;  only  in  this  way,  therefore,  could 
Ehud  inform  himself  of  the  situation  and  humor 
of  the  king.  The  presentation  of  gifts  is  a  lengthy 
ceremony.  The  tenacious  adherence  of  oriental 
nations  to  ancient  customs,  enables  us  to  depict 
the  present  scene  by  the  help  of  Persian  descrip- 
tions of  similar  occasions.     Our  narrator  properly 

speaks  of  the  bearers  of  the  present  as  2^H,  the 
people ;  for  the  more  numerous  the  persons  who 
carried  the  gifts,  the  more  honored  was  the  king 
"  Fifty  persons  often  bear  what  one  man  could 
easily  carry,"  says  Chardin  (Voyage,  iii.  217).  At 
this  ceremony  Ehud  had  no  opportunity  to  attempt 
anything,  for  he  neither  came  near  the  king,  nor 
saw  him  alone  ;  nor  yet  was  he  willing,  among  so 
many  bystanders,  to  involve  his  companions  in  the 
consequences  of  a  possible  failure.  On  the  con- 
trary, he  accompanied  them  back  to  the  borders, 
in  order  to  be  sure  that  he  was  alone  when  making 
the  dangerous  attempt.  Whether  he  suffered  or 
escaped,  he  wished  to  be  unhindered  by  their  pres- 
ence, and  also  to  appear  as  acting  without  their 
concurrence. 

Ver.  19.  But  he  himself  turned  back  from 
the  boundary-stones.    This  is  evidently  the  sense 

in  which  □,7>p5  is  to  be  taken.  vD9  is  always  a 
carved  image,  y\inrT6v.  The  entire  number  of 
instances  in  which  this  word  is  used  by  Scripture 
writers  fails  to  suggest  any  reason  for  thinking 
here  of  "  stone-quarries,"  a  definition  which  more- 
over does  not  appear  to  harmonize  with  the  locality. 
But  as  the  connection  implies  that  the  borders  of 
Eglon's  territory,  which  he  had  wrenched  from 
Israel,  were  at  the  pesilim,  we  must  understand  by 
them  the  posts,  o-ttjAui,  stones,  lapides  sacri,  which 
marked  the  line.  In  consequence  of  the  honors 
everywhere  paid  them,  these  were  considered  Pesi- 
lim, idol  images,  just  as  at  a  later  time  the  Herma, 
(ep/j.aKes.  heaps  of  stone)  were  prohibited  as  idola- 
trous objects  (cf.  Aboda  Sum,  Mischna,  4).     With 

this,  the  interpretation  of  the  Targum.  S^n^H^?, 
heaps  of  unhewn  stones,  may  also  be  made  to  har- 
monize.5    This  border  line  was  in  the  vicinity  of 

8  Hence  they  also  translate  Dit2  by  atrreios,  Ex.  if  2, 
where,  to  be  sure,  it  rather  signifies  ff  beautiful."" 

4  Transferred  to  God,  Ex.  xxiii.  15  :  (r  None  shall  appear 
before  me  empty." 

fi  [To  this  interpretation  of  the  pesffim,  Bachmann  (who 
agrees  with  our  author  in  rejecting  the  commonly  received 
"  stooe-quarries  '*)  objects  that  it  is  not  in  accordance  witlf 


CHAPTER   III.    12-30. 


It 


Gilgal,  which  had  not  fallen  into  the  hands  of 
.Moab.  Ewald  has  rightly  insisted  upon  it  that 
Gilgal  must  have  lain  northeast  of  Jericho  [Gesch. 
des  Volkes  Israel,  ii.  317).  That  this  was  the  rela- 
tive position  of  Gilgal,  and  its  direction  from  Jeri- 
cho, has  already  received  confirmation  from  the 
first  chapter  of  our  Book. 

And  said,  I  have  a  secret  message.  It  could 
not  be  matter  of  surprise  that  Ehud  did  not  make 
this  request  until  his  return.  The  ceremony  of  the 
public  audience  did  not  allow  it  to  be  made  at  that 
time.  The  presentation  of  the  presents  must  have 
been  so  conducted  as  to  impress  the  king  with  the 
conviction  that  Ehud  was  especially  devoted  to 
him.  Signs  of  discontent  and  ill-will  on  the  part 
of  the  subjugated  people  cannot  have  escaped  the 
conqueror.  The  more  highly  would  he  value  the 
devotion  of  one  of  the  Israelitish  leaders.  That 
Ehud  had  sent  his  companions  away,  and  had  not 
returned  until  they  had  crossed  the  border,  was 
easily  explained  as  indicating  that  he  had  a  matter 
to  present  in  which  he  did  not  wish  to  be  observed 
by  them.  All  the  more  eager,  therefore,  was  Eglon 
to  hear  that  which  Ehud  seemed  to  hide  from 
Israel.  It  was  only  by  such  a  feint  that  Ehud 
could  succeed  in  approaching  the  tyrant  and  ob- 
taining a  private  interview.  Israel's  deliverer  must 
first  seem  to  be  its  betrayer.  The  same  artifice  has 
been  used  by  others.  When  the  Persians  wished 
to  destroy  the  pseudo-Smerdis,  and  doubtingly  con- 
sidered how  they  could  pass  the  guards,  Darius 
said  that  he  wouid  pretend  to  have  a  secret  com- 
mission, concerning  Persia,  from  his  father  to  the 
king;  adding,  as  Herodotus  (iii.  72)  says:  "For 
when  lying  is  necessary,  lie  "  ! 

Who  said,  Silence !  Thereupon  all  that  stood 
by  him  went  out.  Ehud  does  not  demean  him- 
self as  if  he  wished  that  those  present  would  depart. 
He  appears  to  be  on  the  point  of  telling  his  secret 
before  them  all.  But  this  Eglon  will  not  permit. 
Oriental  maimers  could  not  be  more  perfectly  set 

forth.  The  king's  injunction  of  silence  (DH,  'st!) 
on  Ehud,  is  of  itself  a  sufficient  command  to  those 
present  to  leave  the  room.  Eglon  must  therefore 
have  expected  matters  not  to  be  heard  by  all  ears. 
All  who  "  stood  "  about  him,  went  out.  They  were 
his  servants  (ver.  24),  who  do  not  sit  when  the 
king  is  present.  "  Happy  are  these  thy  servants," 
says  the  queen  of  Sheba  to  Solomon,  "  who  stand 
continually  before  thee,  and  hear  thy  wisdom." 
In  the  Tiitinameh  (translated  by  Rosen,  i.  42,  43) 
it  is  said :  "  The  King  of  Khorassan  was  once 
sitting  in  his  palace,  and  before  his  throne  stood 
the  pillars  of  the  empire,  the  servants  of  the  crown, 
high  and  low,  great  and  small,"  etc. 

Ver.  20.  Now,  he  had  seated  himself  in 
the  upper  story  of  the  cooling-house.  To  un- 
derstand what  part  of  the  house  is  thus  indicated, 
we  have  only  to  attend  to  the  description  of  orien- 
tal architecture  given  by  Shaw,  in  his  Travels  (i. 
386,  Edinb.  edit.  1808).  Down  to  the  present 
day  many  oriental  houses  have  a  smaller  one  an- 
nexed to  them,  which  sometimes  rises  one  story 
higher  than  the  main  building.  In  Arabic  as  in 
Hebrew  this  is  called  alijah,  and  serves  for  purposes 
of  entire  seclusion  or  rest.  "  There  is  a  door  of 
communication   from  it   into   the   gallery  of   the 

he  usual  meaning  of  the  word.  He  thinks  that  the  pesi- 
im  were  idolatrous  images  set  up  either  by  the  apostate 
Israelites  themselves,  or  by  Eglon,  "  as  boundary-marks  of 
.be  territory  immediately  subject  to  him,  and  as  signs  of  his 

npremacy/'  lie  seems  inclined  to  prefer  the  latter  alter- 
aative,  because  of  rf  the  fact  that  Ehud  does  not  feel  him- 


house,  besides  another  which  opens  immediately, 
from  a  privy  stairs,  down  into  the  porch  or  street] 
without  giving  the  least  disturbance  to  the  house." 
The  alijah  of  Eglon  consisted  of  an  inner  chamber 
opening  on  an  exposed  balcony  (fiHOO),  fron- 
which  a  door  led  into  the  house  itself  (at  present 
called  dor  or  bait)      Within  the  door  of  the  alijah 

there  was  however  still  another  apartment  (""Hri, 
ver.  24),  which  served  the  purpose  of  a  necessarv- 
house.  Being  high  and  freely  accessible  to  cur- 
rents of  air,  the  alijah  was  a  cool  retreat.  Similar 
purposes  were  subserved  in  Germany  by  the  per- 
gula;,  balconies,  galleries,  arbors  {Lauben),  hence 
Luther's  translation,  Sommer-laube  (summer-arbor 
or  bower).  He  followed  the  rendering  of  theLXX. 
who  have  r$  Qepivtfi,  while  the  Targum  gives  more 

prominence  to  the  idea  of  repose  (Sip11!?  fTS, 
koitij).  The  public  reception  of  the  gifts  had  taken 
place  in  the  house.  Afterwards,  while  Ehud  ac- 
companied his  companions,  the  king  had  betaken 
himself  to  the  alijah  "  which  was  for  himself  alone  " 
(his  private  chamber).  When  Ehud  returned  he 
was  received  there,  as  he  had  anticipated. 

And  Ehud  said,  I  have  a  message  from  the 
Deity  unto  thee.     Then  he  arose  from  his  seat. 

C^H  ,£$  15^T  is  a  commission  from  a  higher  be- 
ing. He  does  not  say  Jehovah,  for  this  is  the  name 
of  i he  Israelitish  God,  with  whom  Eglon  has  noth- 
ing to  do.  We  are  not  however  to  assume  that 
the  God  of  Eglon  is  meant ;  for  what  can  Ehud 
the  Israelite  announce  from  Chemosh !  It  is 
therefore  probable  that  by  Elohim  a  superior  prince 
is  to  be  understood,  whose  liegeman  or  satrap  Eg- 
lon was,  as  was  already  intimated  above,  —  a  hu- 
man possessor  of  majesty  and  authority.  As  it  is 
not  to  be  supposed  that  the  capital  of  Moab  was 
transferred  from  Rabbah  to  the  small  bit  of  terri- 
tory which  had  been  acquired  across  the  Jordan, 
Eglon  in  Jericho  is  not  to  be  looked  on  as  lord  of 
all  Moab.  The  relation  in  which  he  stood  to  the 
mother-country  was  most  likely  that  of  a  vassal  or 
feudal  baron.  That  he  is  styled  king  does  not 
contradict  this.  The  potentates  of  single  cities 
were  all  called  "  kings,"  as  the  Greeks  called  them 
Tvpavvoi,  without  on  that  account  being  anything 
more  than  dependents  of  more  powerful  states  and 
princes.1  It  suits  the  role  which  Ehud  wishes  to 
be  ascribed  to  him,  that  he  should  also  have  rela- 
tions with  the  transfluvial  Moab,  a  fact  which  of 
course  must  be  kept  profoundly  secret.  Thus 
Eglon's  rising  is  explained.  The  same  honor  was 
due  to  a  message  from  the  superior  lord  as  to  his 
presence.  Like  reverence  was  shown  to  royal  let- 
ters even,  as  appears  from  the  narrative  of  Herodo- 
tus concerning  a  message  to  Oroetes  ;  and  from  it, 
the  fidelity  of  those  whom  the  message  concerned 
was  inferred  (Herod,  iii.  128).  The  same  mark  of 
honor  was  paid  to  parents  and  aged  persons.  From 
this  custom  the  ecclesiastical  usage  of  standing  dur- 
ing the  reading  of  the  Gospel,  is  also  to  be  derived. 

Eglon  rises  out  of  respect  for  the  D^rw.Jf?  "O^. 
This  has  been  the  constant  explanation.  The  di- 
verging view  of  Bertheau 2  does  not  commend 
itself.     The  Talmud  —  understanding  the  words, 

self  and  those  with  him  secure  until  he  has  passed  the 
pesilim."  —  Tr.] 

1  Thus  the  king  of  Hazor  was  king  paramount  over  all 
the  kings  of  his  vicinity  (Josh.  xi.  10). 

S  [Bertheau  says :  t?  Divining  the  pu  l>ose  of  Ehud,  hi 
rose  up  to  defend  himself."  —  Ta-J 


76 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


however,  of  the  God  of  Israel  —  already  deduces 
from  them  the  lesson,  that  if  a  stranger  thus  rose 
up  to  receive  a  message  from  God,  much  more  is 
it  the  dutv  of  an  Israelite  so  to  do  (Sanhedrin, 
50  a). 

Vers.  21-24.  Immediately  Ehud  put  forth 
his  left  hand.  Ehud  made  use  of  a  pretext,  in 
order  to  cause  Eglon  to  rise.  He  was  surer  of  his 
thrust  if  his  victim  stood.  Eglon's  attention  must 
be  wholly  diverted,  that  the  attack,  entirely  unre- 
sisted, might  be  the  more  effective.  In  such  sud- 
den assaults,  bulky  people  like  Eglon  are  at  a 
disadvantage.  Cimber  pressed  closely  on  Cassar, 
as  if  to  make  most  urgent  entreaty  for  his  brother 
(Plut.,  Caxar,  86).  Parmenio  was  stabbed  by 
Oleander,  while  cheerfully  reading  a  letter  (Cur- 
tius.  vii.  2,  27).  The  instance  most  like  Eglon's 
case,  is  that  of  King  Henry  III.  of  France. 
Clement,  to  secure  an  interview,  had  provided 
himself  with  a  commission  from  a  friend  of  the 
king.  When  he  arrived,  the  king  was  sitting  on 
his  close-stool.  Hoping  to  hear  of  an  understand- 
ing with  his  opponents,  Henry  bade  the  messenger 
draw  near  ;  whereupon  the  monk  stabbed  him  in 
the  abdomen  (cf.  Ranke,  Franks-  Gesch.,  i.  171). 
Ehud's  thrust,  though  left-handed,  was  powerful. 
The  dagger,  together  with  its  short  handle,  buried 
itself  in  the  fat  of  the  man,  and  came  out  behind. 

SHf  signifies  a  flame  ;  then  the  blade  of  a  sword, 
which  glitters  and  burns  like  a  flame.  In  a  medi- 
eval writing,  the  following  words  occur :  "  Sin 
swert  flaianieret  an  siner  hant1  (Miiller's  Mitlelh. 
WBrterb.,  iii.  336).  In  technical  language  we  also 
speak  of  flaming  blades  (yeflammten  klinyen). 

And  came  out  behind,  rT3'"TO~l9n  N2S\ 
The  ancient  doubt  as  to  this  word,  which  occurs 
but  once,  and  about  which  opinions  are  still  divided, 
appears  from  the  divergent  renderings  of  the  Sep- 
tuagint  and  the  Targum.  It  is  certain,  however, 
in  the  first  place,  that  the  Greek  rendering  jrpocrraoa. 
can  have  little  weight ;  for  it  arose  from  the  simi- 
larity of  the  word  in  the  text  to  NT?!)"©,  cur- 
rent at  the  time,  and  meaning  irpoaTas,  vestibule. 
In  the  second  place,  the  addition  of  Ehud  after  the 

second  S"*2  (ver.  23),  shows  that  another  sub- 
ject begins,  and  that  therefore  the  first  N**I2  can 
refer  only  to  the  sword,  not  to  the  man.  Further, 
since  i^5""l,~2n  js  provided  with  !"t  local,  it 
manifestly  denotes  that  part  of  the  body  toward 
which  the  course  of  the  sword  was  directed,  while 

S1'*T  testifies  to  the  actual  perforation  of  the  body. 
Now,  as  the  sword  was  thrust  from  before  into  the 
abdomen  C\  ~2\  there  would  be  no  doubt  as  to  the 
part  where  it  emerged,  even  if  the  etymology,  which 
has  here  to  deal  with  an  onomatopoetic  word,  did  not 
make  this  perfectly  plain.  Parshedon  is  the  Greek 
TrpujurSs,  and  belongs  to  the  same  family  as  the 
Lithuanian  persti,  Lettish  pirst,  Polish  pierdziec, 
Russian  fierdjet.  Greek  weptictv,  Sanscrit pard,  Latin 
prdere,  Gothic  jairtan,  Old  High  German  fe'rzan  (cf. 
Pott,  Etijmolog.  Forsch.,  i.  245  ;  Grimm.  Worterh., 
iii.  1335).     The  sword  emerged  behind  through  the 

1  ["His  sword  flamed  in  his  hand." — Ta.] 
•2  [Robinson's  map  locates  Et-Hdu  not  directly  east,  but 
southeast  of  Jericho,  not  north  but  south  of  Wady  Heshban 
tcf.  Bibl.  R'S.  i.  635).  It  appears  that  the  words  "  directly 
tast  "  belong  to  Seetzen,  and  must  in  Hitter's  opinion  be 
made  to  conform  to  Robinson's  location  of  El  Helu.  Cf. 
Wage's  R!  ter,  Hi.  49.      Van  de  Velde's   map  places   El-Helu 


fundament.  The  king  fell  down  without  uttering 
a  sound.  Ehud  did  not  delay,  but  went  out  un- 
hindered through  the  balcony.  The  attendant! 
had  entirely  withdrawn  from  the  alijah :  Ehud 
takes  advantage  of  this  circumstance,  and  locks  the 
door  to  it,  in  order  to  delay  the  moment  of  discov- 
ery. The  heedless  conduct  of  the  unsuspecting 
attendants  supports  his  boldness.  As  soon  how- 
ever as  they  see  him  go  out,  —  an  earlier  return  to 
their  lord  is  not  lawful,  —  they  endeavor  to  enter 
the  alijah.  Ehud  had  gone  away  so  calmly,  that 
they  suspect  nothing.  They  are  not  even  sur- 
prised when  they  find  the  doors  fastened.  Serarius 
has  properly  directed  attention  to  the  aversion  felt 
by  the  ancients  to  the  least  degree  of  exposure 
when  complying  with  the  necessities  of  nature. 
This  applies  especially  to  kings,  inasmuch  as  sub- 
jection to  these  necessities,  too  plainly  proved 
them  men.  Of  Pharaoh,  the  Jewish  legend  says 
that  he  wished  to  appear  like  a  god,  above  the  need 
of  such  things.  "  He  covers  his  feet,"  is  a  euphe- 
mism, taken  from  the  descent  of  the  long  garments 
(cf.  Bochart,  Hierozoicon,  i.  677). 

Vers.   25-30.      And   they   waited    long,    TO 

K?"I3.  These  words  add  the  notion  of  displeasure 
and  ill  humor  to  the  idea  of  waiting  (cf.  2  Kgs. 
ii.  17  ;  viii.  II).  At  length  they  comprehend  that 
something  extraordinary  must  have  taken  place. 
They  procure  another  key,  with  which  they  open 
the  doors,  and  find  their  lord  —  dead.  Ehud's  arti- 
fice, however,  had  succeeded.     While  they  delayed 

(Cn^narin,  from  niSnJS,  morari,  is  onomato- 
poetic), he  had  got  beyond  the  border,  as  far  as  Sei- 
rah.  This  place,  which  according  to  ver.  27  be- 
longed to  the  mountains  of  Ephraim,  is  unknown. 
It  bounded  the  territories  of  Benjamin  on  the 
north.  Ehud  reached  it  by  way  of  the  border 
which  ran  by  Gilgal,  which  shows  that  both  these 
places  were  north  of  Jericho.  It  is  evident  that  he 
had  agreed  with  the  Israelites  to  give  the  signal 
there,  in  case  he  were  successful.  His  trumpet- 
blast  was  transmitted  among  the  mountains.  Is- 
rael flocked  together,  and  heard  of  the  unprece- 
dentedly  fortunate  deed.  The  people  saw  in  it 
the  firm  resolve,  which  gives  victory.  The  plan 
of  battle  had  also  been  already  determined  by 
Ehud.  It  was  of  the  last  importance  to  cut  the 
terrified  and  leaderless  Moabites  off  from  the  assist- 
ance of  their  transjordanic  friends.  Hence,  the  first 
care  of  Israel  is  to  seize  the  ford  of  the  river.  The 
ford  in  question  was  manifestly  no  other  than  that 
which,  directly  east  of  Jericho,  half  an  hour  north 
of  Wady  Heshban,  is  still  in  use.  Seetzen  called  it 
el-Mokl'daa,  Robinson  el-Helu'*  (Ritter  xv.  484,  547, 
Gage's  transl.  iii.  4, 49).  That  the  occupation  of  this 
ford  decides  the  victorv,  proves  clearly  that  Eglon 
was  not  king  of  all  Moab,  but  only  of  the  Moab 
on  this  side  of  the  Jordan.  It  was  a  terrible  retri- 
bution, a  sort  of  "  Sicilian  vespers."  which  Israel, 
rising  up  after  long  subjection,  inflicted  on  Eglon 
and  his   people.     The  falling   foes   were  men  of 

might.    7^?^'  tT'K   expresses  the  distinction  (das 

Ans?hn),s  Tn  EVS  the  warlike  character  and 
abilities,    of   the    smitten    enemies.      Moab    was 

southeast  of  Jericho,  a  short  distance  north  of  W.  Heshban. 
_Ts.] 

3  [Bebtheao:  "  ]pt£\  the  fet,t.  e.  (In  contrast  with  pet* 
sons  of  starved  appearance)  the  well-fed  and  opulent  man  * 
cf.  Latin  ophrtus  ;  hence,  the  man  of  consequence."  But 
compare  note  8  under  "  Textual  and  Grammatical."  —  Tr.' 


CHAPTER   III.    12-30. 


•horoughly   vanquished,  and  Israel   had   rest   for 
eighty  years. 

The  exploit  of  Ehud  doubtless  surpasses  all  sim- 
ilar deeds  of  ancient  history  in  the  purity  of  its 
motive,  as  well  as  in  the  energy  and  boldness  of  its 
execution.  Harmodius  and  Aristogiton,  however 
celebrated  by  the  Athenians,  were  moved  to  kill 
Hipparehus  by  private  interests  (cf.  Thucyd.  vi. 
56).  Blind  warrior-fury  fills  Mucins  Scsevola,  as 
also  Theodotus  (Polyb.  v.  81),  the  would-be  mur- 
derer of  Ptolemseus,  and  they  fail  of  success. 
Ehud  was  equally  bold  and  pure.  He  risked  his 
life  for  no  interest  of  his  own,  but  for  his  people. 
And  not  merely  for  the  external  freedom  of  his 
nation,  but  for  the  maintenance  and  honor  of  its 
divine  religion,  which  was  inseparably  linked  with 
freedom.  It  was  against  the  mortal  enemy  of  Is- 
rael—  against  one  lying  under  the  ban,  and  shut 
out  from  the  congregation  of  Israel  —  that  he 
lifted  up  his  sword.  He  exposed  himself  to  a  fear- 
ful peril,  in  order,  if  successful,  to  give  therewith  a 
signal  of  courage  and  comfort  to  his  people.  To 
be  sure,  if  he  did  not  succeed,  the  hatred  and  op- 
pression of  the  enemy  would  increase  in  violence. 
But  for  that  very  reason  men  saw  the  more  clearly 
that  God  had  raised  him  up  to  be  a  deliverer. 
And  yet,  where  in  Israel  are  those  praises  of  Ehud, 
which  in  Athens  resounded  for  centuries  in  honor 
of  Harmodius  ?  Scaevola's  deed 1  is  celebrated  as 
one  of  the  nation's  heroic  performances.  The  his- 
torian makes  him  say  (Livy,  xi.  12):  "As  an 
enemy  have  I  slain  the  enemy."  It  is  true,  the 
remarkable  act  has  had  the  honor  of  being  minutely 
handed  down,  even  to  the  least  details  of  its  prog- 
ress. But  all  this  was  to  point  out  the  sagacity 
and  energy  of  the  strong  left-handed  man.  Not 
one  word  of  praise  is  found.  On  the  contrary  — 
and  this  fact  deserves  attention  —  the  remark  usu- 
ally made  of  other  Judges,  is  here  wanting :  it  is 
not  said  that  "the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  was  upon 
him."  Norisitsaid,  asofOthniel,  that  he"  judged 
Israel."  Neither  are  we  told  that  the  rest  and 
peace  of  Israel  were  connected  with  his  life  and 
death.  Subsequent  exegesis  called  him  the  Wolf, 
with  which  Benjamin  is  compared  (Midrash,  Ber. 
Rabba,  cap.  89,  p.  87  a).  As  the  wolf  throws  him- 
self on  his  prey,  so  had  Ehud  thrown  himself  on 
Eglon.  They  saw  in  Ehud's  deed  the  act  of  a 
mighty  man,  influenced  by  zeal  for  God ;  but  the 
u  Spirit  of Jehovah  "  inspires  neither  such  artifice  nor 
such  murder.  So  much  the  less  could  the  act  of 
Ehud,  however  brilliant  under  the  circumstances, 
be  made  to  exculpate  similar  deeds.  So  much  the 
less  could  the  crimes  that  defile  the  pages  of  Chris- 
tian history,  such  as  those  committed  against 
Henry  III.  and  Henry  IV.,  use  it  as  a  cover  for 
themselves.2  Although  Eglon  was  a  heathen,  a 
foreigner,  a  tyrant,  an  enemy  actually  engaged  in 

1  In  Plutarch's  Parallels  of  Greek  and  Roman  History 
(n.  2),  the  same  history  is  given  of  a  Greek,  Neocles,  who 
made  an  attempt  against  Xerxes  like  that  of  Scaevola  against 
Porsenna. 

2  Excellent  remarks  are  found  in  the  work  of  Hugo  Gro- 
tius,  De  Jure  Betli  el  Pads,  lib.  i  cap.  iv.  (ed.  Traj.,  1773),  p. 
178.  Serarius  declines  to  treat  the  subject,  under  the  feeble 
pretext  of  lack  of  time,  p.  92.  (Compare  Bayle,  Dietion- 
naire,  8.  v.  Mariana,  ii.  2051,  e.) 

8  [Wordsworth  :  "  Some  have  raised  objections  to  this 
feet  of  Ehud,  as  censurable  on  moral  grounds :  and  they 
lave  described  him  as  a  r  crafty  Israelite,'  taking  aD  unfair 
Advantage  over  an  unwieldy  corpulent  Moabite  ;  others  have 
ipologized  for  it,  on  the  plea  that  it  is  not  to  be  measured 
»y  w*»at  M»y  call  the  standard  of  our  '  enlightened  modem 


hostilities,  the  Scripture  speaks  of  Ehud  only  as  a 
deliverer,  but  never  of  his  deed  as  sprung  from  the 
Spirit  of  God.  How  much  more  disgraceful  are 
murder  and  treason  against  one's  own  king, 
countrymen,  and  fellow  Christians !  It  was  an  in- 
sult to  Christianity,  a  sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost 
when  in  answer  to  Clement's  question,  whether  a 
priest  might  kill  a  tyrant,  it  was  determined  that 
"  it  was  not  a  mortal  sin.  but  only  an  irregularity  " 
(Ranke,  Franz.  Gesch.,  i.  473) ;  orwhen  Pope  Paul 
V.  exclaimed,  with  reference  to  the  murder  of 
Henry  IV.  by  Ravaillac  :  "  Deus  gentium  fecit  hoc, 
quia  datus  in  reprobum  sensum."  Worse  than  *.h; 
dagger  is  such  doctrine.3 

HOMTT.BTICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

Ehud,  the  Judge  with  the  two-edged  sword.  — 
1 .  Israel  was  again  in  bondage  on  account  of  sin. 
And  the  compassion  of  God  was  not  exhausted, 
although  no  deliverer  came  out  of  Judah.  In  the 
kingdom  of  God,  the  great  and  rich  may  indeed 
become  instruments  of  God's  will ;  but  his  power 
is  not  confined  to  them.  If  no  one  arises  in  Judah. 
some  one  in  Benjamin  does.  If  it  be  not  Othniel, 
Caleb's  nephew,  it  is  some  unknown  person  who 
comes  to  rescue  his  people.  Neither  the  name, 
nor  the  physique,  is  material.  Deliverance  may  be 
begun  with  the  left  hand. 

2.  Ehud  kills  Eglon,  the  tyrant  of  Israel ;  yet 
he  is  not  properly  a  murderer,  but  only  a  warrior. 
However,  it  is  better  to  conquer  as  Othniel  and 
Gideon  conquered.  He  did  it,  not  for  private  re- 
venge, nor  from  fanaticism,  but  for  the  just  freedom 
of  Israel  and  its  religion.  He  did  it  against  Moab, 
and  not  against  one  who  shared  his  own  faith  and 
country.  God  raised  him  up ;  but  yet  the  Word 
of  God  does  not  approve  his  deed.  He  was  a  de- 
liverer of  Israel ;  but  there  hangs  a  shadow  never- 
theless over  his  official  activity.  Therefore,  no 
murderous  passion  can  appeal  to  him.  By  him  no 
tyrant-murder,  no  political  assassination,  is  excul- 
pated. And  this  not  simply  because  in  Christian 
states  and  churches  there  can  be  no  Eglons  or 
Moabs.  —  Starke  :  "  The  Jesuit  principle  that  it 
is  right  to  put  an  heretical  prince  out  of  the  way, 
will  never  be  valid  until  a  person  can  be  certain 
of  having  such  a  calling  from  God  to  it,  as  Ehud 
undoubtedly  had."  —  His  cause  was  pure;  which 
cannot  be  said  of  any  other  assassination  in  his- 
tory, —  Christian  history  not  excepted,  —  down  to 
the  murder  of  the  North  American  President  Lin- 
coln ;  not  even  of  those  instances  which  remind  us 
(as  Mallet,  Altes  und  Xeues,  p.  92,  so  beautifully 
did  with  reference  to  G.  Sand,  the  murderer  of 
Kotzebue)  of  the  words  of  the  Lord:  "Fatlur, 
forgive  them  ;  tor  they  know  not  what  they  do." 

Gerlach  :     We  are  not  to  think  that  "the  dee  1 

civilization  '  compared  with  what  they  term  the  f  barbarous 
temper  of  those  times.'  But  surely  these  are  low  and  un- 
worthy motives."  He  then  quotes  with  approbation  from 
Bp.  SandersoD  and  Dr.  Waterland,  the  gist  of  whose  remarkl 
(Sanderson's  however  being  made  with  immediate  referenc* 
to  the  act  of  Phinehas,  Num.  xxv.)  is,  that  the  Lord  raise, 
up  deliverers  for  Israel,  and  divinely  warranted  their  actions, 
which  actions,  however,  form  no  precedents  for  those  who 
have  not  similar  divine  authority.  But  it  is  surely  not  an 
improper  question  to  ask,  whether,  when  God  raised  up  a 
hero,  endowed  him  with  faith  and  zeal,  with  strength  and 
energy,  to  secure  certain  results,  He  also,  jtlways  and 
necessarily,  suggested  or  even  approved  the  met!  Ida  adopted 
not  only  as  a  whole  but  even  in  detail.  —  Te.] 


78 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


of  Ehud,  in  the  manner  of  its  accomplishment,  is 
set  be?  .—"  us  as  an  example  ;  but  we  must  also 
beware  list,  because  the  manner  is  no  longer  allow- 
able, we  be  led  to  deny  the  operation  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  by  whom  this  "deliverer  of  his  people  was 
impelled. 

3.  Because  Ehud's  cause  was  pure,  his  deed  was 
followed  by  peace  and  freedom.  That  can  be  said 
of  no  other  similar  deed.  He  first  searched  out  the 
enemy  in  his  hiding-place,  and  then  triumphed 
over  him  in  the  battlefield.  He  shows  himself,  —  1, 
a  true  Israelite  by  faith ;  2,  a  true  son  of  Benja- 
min, who   was   compared   with   the   wolf,  by  his 


strength.  He  drew  his  sword,  not  for  the  sake  of 
war,  but  of  peace.  Therefore,  Israel  had  peace 
through  him  until  he  died. 

Ehud  may  not  improperly  be  considered  a  type 
in  spirit  of  him  who  likewise  sprang  from  Benja- 
min—  of  Saul  who  first  ravened  like  a  wolf,  but 
became  patient  and  trustful  like  a  Iamb  ;  of  the 
Apostle  who  called  the  Word  of  God  a  two-edged 
sword  that  pierces  through  the  conscience ;  of 
Paul,  whose  symbol  in  the  church  is  the  sword 
through  which  as  martyr  he  lost  his  own  life,  afte." 
he  had  saved  the  lives  of  thousands  by  the  sword 
of  the  Spirit. 


Shamgar  smites  six  hundred  Philistines  with  an  ox-goad. 

Chapter    III.     31. 

81  And  after  him  was  Shamgar  the  son  of  Anath,  which  [and  he]  slew  [smote]  of 
the  Philistines  six  hundred  men  with  an  ox-goad  ;  and  he  also  [he,  too,]  delivered 
Israel. 


EXEGETICAL   AND  DOCTRINAL. 

After  him.  After  his  example.  Following 
Ehud's  example,1  Shamgar  smote  the  Philistines. 
That  the  expression  is  not  to  be  taken  of  time,  as 
if  on  the  death  of  Ehud  Shamgar  had  succeeded 
him,  is  evident  from  eh.  iv.  1.  Moreover,  if  that 
were  the  meaning,  a  statement  of  the  years  of 
Shamgar  would  not  be  absent.  The  hypothesis  of 
Josephus,  that  he  governed  one  year,  is  untena- 
ble. Accordingly,  the  other  Jewish  expositors  have 
properly  assigned  the  exploit  of  Shamgar  to  the 
time  of  Ehud,  i.  e.  to  the  period  of  eighty  years. 

Shamgar,'-  the  son  of  Anath.  To  what  tribe 
he  belonged,  is  not  stated.  If  it  be  correct  to  con- 
nect njl?  with  mnDl?)  Anathoth  (cf.  Kaplan, 
Erets  Kedumim,  ii.  142),  it  will  follow  that  like 
Ehud  he  was  of  Benjamin,  and  defended  the  terri- 
tory of  that  tribe  in  the  west  against  the  Philis- 
tines, as  Ehud  did  in  the  east  against  the  Moabites. 
His  whole  history,  as  here  given,  consists  of  a  sin- 
gle heroic  exploit,  in  which  he  repulsed  an  attack 
of  the  Philistines  with  extraordinary  strength. •* 

With  an  ox-goad.  The  Septuagint  gives 
aporpoTrovs,  by  which  it  evidently  means  the  plough- 

1  [Bachmann  observes  that  this  and  similar  interpreta- 
tions of  this  expression,  militate  against  the  analogy  of  ch. 

x.  1,  3 ;  xii.  8,  11,  13,  in  all  which  passages  ^IfTS  refers 
to  the  duration  of  the  official  or  natural  life  of  the  pre- 
viously mentioned  person-  Appealing  to  ch.  v.  6,  where 
the  "days  of  Shamgar"  are  described  in  such  a  way  as  to 
exclude  the  supposition  that  they  belonged  to  the  period  of 
"  rest "  obtained  by  Kbud.  he  makes  them  synchronous 
with  some  part  of  the  Canaauite  oppression  under  Jabin. 
While  the  Cauaanites  subjugated  the  northern  part  of  the 
And.  the  Philistines  attempted  to  extend  their  power  in  the 
south,  which  occasioned  the  conflicts  of  Shamgar  with 
them.  —  Te.) 

2  "HS^tP.  The  ancients  translated  it :  Nomen  Ad- 
ttena,  "  Name  of  a  stranger."  Ehud  was  the  son  of  a  cer- 
*am    S"^3       Perhaps  Shamgar  also  is   somehow  related  to 

T" 

*»at  name. 


handle,  stiva,  that  part  which  the  ploughman 
holds  in  his  hand,  and  with  which  he  guides  the 
plough.4  More  correct,  however,  is  the  render- 
ing "ox-goad"  (cf.  Bochart,  Hierozoicon,  i.  385); 

S»"Virn  V3~l%  as  the  Targum  has  it.  It  was  the 
•'prick"  against  which  the  oxen  "kicked,"  when 
struck  with  it.  The  Greeks  called  it  fioim-Aijf. 
With  such  an  instrument,  King  Lycurgus  is  said 
to  have  attacked  the  wandering  Bacchus  and  his 
followers5  (II.  vi.  135).  There  is  a  tradition  in 
Holstein  that  in  the  Swedish  time  a  peasant 
armed  with  a  pole  put  to  flight  a  multitude  of 
Swedes  who  had  entered  his  house  and  threatened 
to  burn  it  (MullenhorT,  Sagen,  etc.,  p.  81). 

He  delivered  Israel.  He  procured  victory  for 
them,  and  assisted  them  over  the  danger  of  present 
and  local  subjugation.  But  to  "  deliver"  is  not  to 
"judge."  Nor  is  there  any  mention  of  the 
"  Spirit  of  the  Lord  "  in  connection  with  him. 


HOMTLETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

Shamgar  the  deliverer  with  the  ox-goad.  Coura- 
geous examples  find  worthy  followers.     Shamgar 

8  [Bachmann'  :  "  We  are  undoubtedly  to  think  here  of  a 
marauding  band  like  those  brought  to  view  in  1  Sam.  xxx. 
1  ff.  aud  Job  i.  15.  against  whom  Shamgar,  either  engaged 
at  the  moment  in  ploughing,  or  else  seizing  the  first  weapon 
that  came  to  hand,  proceeded  with  an  ox-goad,  with  such 
•fleet  as  to  strike  down  six  hundred  of  them."  —  Tr.] 

4  This  interpretation  of  the  LXX.  has  nothing  to  do  (a* 

Bertheau     thinks)    with    the    reading    HiT^H      12'  ^2. 

'tt  -  -  .    ■' 

found  by  Augustine. 

6  This  legend  is  copiously  treated  by  Nonnus,  on  the 
basis  of  Horner's  version  of  it.  It  is  remarkable  that  al- 
though the  scene  is  laid  in  "  Arabia,"  Nonnus  neverthe- 
less transfers  the  above-mentioned  event  and  the  city  of 
Lycurgus  to  Carmel  and  the  Erythraean  Sea.  It  is  doubt- 
less true,  as  Kohler  observes  ( Die  Liottysiaka  von  Normm 
von  Panopolis,  Halle,  1853,  pp.  78  77),  that  by  0ov7tAtj£ 
Nonnus  appears  to  have  understock  an  axt.  The  Romas 
poets  also  give  an  axe  to  Lycurgus 


CHAPTER  IV.   1-11.  7S 


trode  in  Ehud's  footsteps.  One  triumphs  with  a  weapon,  and  put  to  flight  the  enemy  whom  some 
sword,  the  other  with  an  implement  of  peace.  I  terror  from  God  had  scared. 
Hence  we  may  infer,  Bays  Origen,  that  a  judge  of  [Henry:  1.  God  can  make  those  eminently 
the  clnirch  need  not  always  carry  a  sword,  and  be  serviceable  to  his  glory  and  the  church's  good, 
full  of  severity  and  admonitions  to  repentance,  but  j  whose  extraction,  education,  and  employment  are 
should  also  be  like  a  husbandman,  "who,  grad-  very  obscure.  He  that  has  the  residue  of  the 
nally  opening  the  earth  with  his  plough,  prepares  i  Spirit,  could,  when  he  pleased,  make  ploughmen 
it  for  the  reception  of  good  seed."  I  judges  and  generals,  and  fishermen  apostles.    2.  It 

Starke  :      When    God   wishes   to   terrify   the  I  is  no  matter  what  the  weapon  is,  if  God  direct  and 


enemy,  He  needs  not  many  men.  nor  strong  de- 
fense and  preparation  for  the  purpose.  —  Gerlach  : 
Shamgar's  deed  is  probably  to  be  viewed  only  as 
the  effect  of  a  sudden  outbreak  of  holy  enthusiasm, 
under  the  influence  of  which  he  seized  the  first  best 


strengthen  the  arm.  An  ox-goad,  when  God 
pleases,  shall  do  more  than  Goliath's  sword.  And 
sometimes  He  chooses  to  work  by  such  unlikely 
means,  that  the  excellency  of  the  power  may  ap- 
pear to  be  of  God.  —  Tk.J 


THIRD   SECTION. 


THE    SERVITUDE     TO   JABIN,     KINO    OP    CANAAN.      DEBORAH,  THE    FEMALE    JUDGE  OP  FIERY    SPIRIT, 

AND   BARAK,    THE    MILITARY    HERO. 


Ehud  being  dead,  Israel  falls  back  into  evil-doing,  and  is  given  up  to  the  tyranny  of 
Jabin,  king  of  Canaan.     Deborah,  the  Prophetess,  sumtnons  Barak  to  undertake  the 

work  of  deliverance. 

Chapter  IV.    1-11. 

1  And   the   children  [sons]  of  Israel  again  did  [continued  to  do]  evil  in  the  sight 

2  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah  ;]  when  [and]  Ehud  was  dead.  And  the  Lord  [Jehovah"; 
sold  them  [gave  them  up]  into  the  hand  of  Jabin  king  of  Canaan  that  reigned  in 
Hazor,  the  captain  of  whose  host  was  Sisera,  which  dwelt  in  Harosheth  of  the  Gen- 

3  tiles  [Harosheth-Hagojim].  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  cried  unto  the  Lord 
[Jehovah]  ;  for  he  had  nine  hundred  chariots  of  iron  ;  and  twenty  years  he  mightily 

4  oppressed  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel.     And  Deborah,  a  prophetess,  the  witie  of 

5  Lapidoth,1  she  judged  Israel  at  that  time.  And  she  dwelt  [sat 2]  under  the  palm-tree 
of  Deborah,  between  Ramah  and  Beth-el  in  mount  Ephraim :  and  the  children  [sons] 

6  of  Israel  came  up  to  her  for  judgment.  And  she  sent  and  called  Barak  the  son  of 
Abinoam  out  of  Kedesh-naphtali.  and  said  unto  him.  Hath  not  the  Lord  [Jehovah 
the]  God  of  Israel  commanded  [thee],  saying.  Go.  and  draw  toward  mount  Tabor,3 
and  take  with  thee  ten  thousand  men  of  the  children   [sons]  of  Naphtali,  and  of  the 

7  children  [sous]  of  Zebulun  ?  And  I  will  draw  unto  thee,  to  the  river  [brook] 
Kishon,  Sisera  the  captain   of  Jabin's  army,  with4  his  chariots  and  his   multitude; 

8  and  I  will  deliver  him  into  thine  hand?     And  Barak  said  unto  her,  If  thou  wilt  go 

9  with  me,  then  I  wall  go :  but  if  thou  wilt  not  go  with  me,  then  I  will  not  go.  And 
she  said,  I  will  surely  go  with  thee:  notwithstanding  [but]  the  journey  that  thou 
takest  [the  expedition  on  which  thou  goest]  shall  not  be  for  thine  honour  ;  for  the 
Lord  [Jehovah]  shall  sell  [give  up]  Sisera  into  the  hand  of  a  woman.     And  Deborah 

10  arose,  and  went  with  Barak  to  Kedesh.  And  Barak  called  Zebulun  and  Naphtali 
to  Kedesh  ;  and  he  went  up  with  ten  thousand  men  at  his  feet : 6  and  Deborah  went 

1 1  up  with  him.  Now  Heber  the  Kenite,  which  was  of  the  children  [sons]  of  Holiab 
the  father-  [brother-]  in-law  of  Moses,  had  severed  himself  from  the  Kenites,  and 
pitched  his  tent  unto  the  plain  of  Zaanaim  [near  Elon-Zaanannira],  which  is  by 
Kedesh.6 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[I  Ver.  4 —  ilTP^V  i""lt£*S:  Dr.  Cassel,  taking   the   second  of  these  words  as  an  appellative,  readers,  — ein  Weit 
t*n  Feuergeist,  a  woman  of  fiery  spirit,  cf.  his  remarks  below.     The  possibility  of  this  rendf-ing  cannot  be  defied  ;  bu( 


80 


lilE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


It  is  at  least  equally  probable  that  the  ordinary  view  which  regards  Lapidoth  as  a  proper  noun  is  correct.  Bachm&nn 
points  out  that  the  succession  of  statements  in  this  passage  is  exactly  the  same  as  iu  "  Miriam  the  prophetess,  the  sister  ol 
Aaron,"  K  Huldah  the  prophetess,  the  wife  of  Shallum,"  rt  Anna,  a  prophetess,  the  daughter  of  Pbanuel,"  etc.  These 
Instances  create  a  presumption  that  in  this  case  too  the  second  statement  after  the  name  will  be  one  of  family  relation- 
ship, which  in  the  absence  of  positive  proof  the  mere  grammatical  possibility  of  another  view  does  not  suffice  to  counter- 
vail. The  feminine  ending  of  Lapidoth  creates  as  little  difficulty  as  it  does  iu  Naboth,  and  other  instances  of  the  same 
Bort.  Of  Lapidoth  we  have  no  knowledge  whatever.  The  mention  here  made  of  him  does  not  necessarily  imply  that  he 
was  still  living.    Cf.  Ruth  iv.  10  ;  1  Sam.  xxvii.  3  ;  etc.  —  Tb.] 

[ii  Ver.  5.  —   n^^l'*  •   Bacbmann  also  translates  ff  sat "  (sass),  although  he  interprets  "  dwelt  ;  "  cf.  ch.  x.  1  ;  Joah. 

ii.  15  ;  2  Kgs.  xxii.  14.     "  As  according  to  the  last  of  these  passages  the  prophetess  Huldah  had  her  dwelling     (S^HI 

fl^EE'V)  in  the  second  district  of  Jerusalem,  so  the  prophetess  Deborah  had  her  dwelling  (j""l^t£*V  K^PP)  under 
the'  Palm  of  Deborah. ''  —  Te.] 

[S  Ver.  6.—  ""OFI     Tt3     FQtPB1!  :    Dr.  Cassel,  —  Ziehe   auf  den   Berg    Tabor,  proceed  to  Mount  Tabor.     8o 
t-:t:-t 

4iany  others.     For   2  with  a  verb  of  motion,  cf.  Ps.  xxiv.  3.     But  inasmuch  as  TTtfD    recurs  immediately  in  ver   7, 

ind  is  there   transitive,  Bachmaun  proposes  to  take  it  so  here :  go,  draw  sc.  an  army,  to  thyself  or  together,  ou  Moutt 

Tabor.     Cf  the  Vulgate.  —  Tr.] 

[4  Ver.  7.  —  133"l"i""lS1  :  properly,  "  and  (not,  with)  his  chariots,"  etc.,  although  Cassel  also  has  mit.  j"1S  is  the 
sign  of  the  accusative,  not  the  preposition,  as  appears  from  the  fact  that  it  has  the  copula  "  and  "  before  it.  —  Te.] 

[S  Ver.  10.—    YO;H2  :  if  the  subject  of    7l?sT  be  Barak,  as  the  E.  V.  and  Dr.   Cassel  take  it,   Vb^PS   can 

L  T    .     _     .  _  __  T     .      .    . 

hardly  mean  anything  else  than  tr  on  foot,''  as  Dr.  Cassel  renders  it ;  cf.  ver.  15.  But  the  true  construction  —  true,  be- 
cause regular  and  leaving  nothing  to   be  supplied  —  is  that  which  De  Wette  adopts:   "and   there   went  np,  V*v3^S, 

ten  thousand  men.1'  In  this  construction,  which  harmonizes  perfectly  with  the  context,  VvJHS  evidently  means  "at 
his  feet,''  i.  e.  as  De  Wette  renders,  "after  him."  —  Tr  ] 

[6  Ver.  11.  —  Dr.  Cassel's  translation  adheres  strictly  to  the  order  of  the  original :  "  And  Heber,  the  Kenite,  had  severed 
himself  from  Kain,  the  sons  of  Hobab,  the  brother-in-law  of  Moses,  and  had  pitched  his  tent  uear  Elon-Zaanannim,  by 
Kedesh.  On  the  rendering  "  brother-in-law,"  instead  of  "  father-in-law,"  cf.  Keil,  on  Ex.  ii.  18  ;  Smith's  BibL  Diet.  B.  T. 
Hobab. —  Te.] 


EXEGETICAL  AMD  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  1.  And  Ehud  was  dead :  i.e.  for  Ehud 
was  no  more.  That  the  eighty  years  of  rest  were 
also  the  years  of  Ehud's  government  is  not  indeed 
expressly  stated,  but  seems  nevertheless  to  be  indi- 
cated in  this  verse.  For  "rest"  is  always  coinci- 
dent with  "  obedience  towards  God;"  and  obedi- 
ence is  maintained  in  Israel  through  the  personal 
influence  of  the  Judge.  When  he  dies,  the  weak- 
ness of  the  people  manifests  itself  anew.  Hence, 
when  we  read  that  the  people  "continued  to  do 
evil,  and  Ehud  was  dead,"  this  language  must  be 
understood  to  connect  the  cessation  of  rest  with  the 
death  of  Ehud.  Shamgar  —  no  mention  being 
made  of  him  here  —  must  have  performed  his  ex- 
ploit  some   time  during   the   eighty   years.     The 

standing  expression  ^""D"!,  "  and  they  con- 
tinued," is  to  be  regarded  as  noting  the  contin- 
uance of  that  fickleness  which  obtains  among  the 
people  when  not  led  by  a  person  of  divine  enthusi- 
asm. They  always  enter  afresh  on  courses  whose 
inevitable  issues  they  might  long  since  have  learned 
to  know.  The  new  generation  learns  nothing 
from  the  history  of  the  past.  "They  continued," 
is.  therefore,  really  equivalent  to  "  they  began 
anew." 

Vers.  2,  3.  And  Jehovah  gave  them  up  into 
the  hand  of  Jabin,  king  of  Canaan,  etc.  Joshua 
already  had  been  obliged  to  sustain  a  violent  eon- 
test  with  a  Jabin.  kiiii:  of  Hazor.  He  commanded 
a  confederation  of  tribes,  whose  frontier  reached 
as  far  ejuth  as  Dor  (Tantura)  on  the  coast,  and 
the  plains  below  the  Sea  of  Tiberias.  The  battle 
)f  Jabin  with  Joshua  took  place  at  the  waters  of 
Merom  (Lake  Huleh)  ;  and  from  that  fact  alone 
Josephus  inferred  that  "  Hazor  lay  above  (vwtp- 
<tWai)  this  sea."  But  its  position  was  by  no  means 

1  [Itachmami  identifies  n  Hazor  with  Hdzzur  or  Ilazireh, 
two  hours  W.  of  Bint  Jebeil,  in  the  heart  of  Northern  Qali- 
ee,  on  an  acclivity  with  extensive  ruins  and  a  sepulchral 
»»ult  of    great  antiquity,"   cf.    Rob.  ill.  62.     He   remarks 


so  close  to  the  lake  as  Robinson  ( BibL  lies.,  iii.  365) 
wishes  to  locate  it,  which  is  altogether  impossible 
The  course  of  Joshua  makes  it  clear  that  it  lay  or. 
the  road  from  Lake  Merom  to  Zidon.  For  in 
order    to    capture    Hazor,   Joshua    turned    back 

(2tf  *1,  Josh.  xi.  10)  from  the  pursuit.  It  appears 
from  our  passage,  and  also  from  Josh.  xix.  37 
that  it  must  have  been  situated  not  very  far  from 
Kedesh,  but  in  such  a  direction  that  from  it  the 
movements  of  Israel  toward  Tabor,  on  the  line  of 
Naphtali  and  Zebulon,  could  not  be  readily  ob- 
served or  hindered  :  that  is  to  say,  to  the  west  of 
Kedesh.  That  its  position  cannot  be  determined 
by  the  similarity  of  modern  names  alone,  is  shown 
by  the  experience  of  Kobinson,  who  successively 
rejected  a  Hazireh,  a  Tell  Hazur,  and  el-Hazury 
(for  which  Hitter  had  decided).  For  a  capital  of 
such  importance  as  Hazor  here  and  elsewhere  ap- 
pears to  be,  an  elevated  situation,  commanding  the 

lowlands  CIP^S"^  v'S),  must  be  assumed.  It  must 
have  been  a  fortress  supported  by  rich  and  fertile 
fields.  These  conditions  are  met  by  Tibnin.  as  is 
evident  from  Robinson's  extended  description  of  it 
(ii.  451  if. ;  iii.  57  ff).  The  similarity  of  name  is 
not  wanting ;  for  the  Crusaders  must  have  had 
some  reason  for  calling  it  Toronum.  William  of 
Tyre  ( Hist.  lib.  xi.  5  ;  in  Gesta  Dei  Francorum,  p. 
798)  described  the  place  as  adorned  with  vineyards 
and  trees,  the  land  fertile  and  adapted  for  "tutiva- 
tion.  It  lies  midway  between  Tyre  and  Paneas, 
and  is  of  immense  importance  for  the  control  of 
the  country.  Robinson  has  justly  remarked,  that 
a  fortress  must  have  been  on  this  spot  long  before 
the  time  of  the  Crusaders ;  nor  does  it  raise  any 
great  difficulty  that  William  of  Tyre  reckoned  it 
to  the  tribe  of  Asher,  on  whose  borders,  at  all 
events,  it  lay.1  —  The  Jabin,  king  of  Hazor,  of  our 

that  for  Tibnin  nothing  speaks  except  its  importance  from  a 
military  point  of  view,  which  of  itself  is  not  sufficient  evi- 
dence. "  The  similarity  of  the  mediaeval  name  ToronuiB 
(  =  Hazor?)  is  wholly  illusory."  —  Tr.1 


CHAPTER   IV.    1-11. 


81 


passage,  evidently  cherished  the  design  of  regain- 
ing, in  some  favorable  hour  of  Israelitish  supine- 
cess,  the  territory  taken  from  his  ancestors  by 
Joshua.  With  this  object  in  view,  his  general-in- 
;hief,  Sisera,  kept  the  languishing  nation  under 
discipline  at  another  point.  The  name  of  Sisera's 
residence  was  Harosheth  Hagojim.  It  may  per- 
haps be  possible  to  fix  this  hitherto  wholly  un- 
known place  also.  The  power  of  the  present  jabin 
must  have  extended  as  far  as  that  of  the  earlier  one 
(i.  e.  to  Tantura  and  the  region  south  of  the  Sea 
of  Tiberias) ;  since  otherwise  the  battle  with  Barak 
would  not  have  been  fought  at  the  Kishon.  More- 
over, Naphtali,  Zebulun,  and  Issachar  were  all  in- 
terested in  the  war  against  him  (ch.  v.  15).  This 
being  the  case,  it  is  certainly  probable  that  Sisera's 
residence  was  in  this  southern  part  of  Jabin's  do- 
minions. Sisera  was  commander  of  an  army 
dreaded  chiefly  for  its  nine  hundred  iron  chariots. 
But  these  were  of  consequence  only  on  level 
ground.  That  is  the  reason  why,  Josh.  xvii.  16, 
such  prominence  is  given  to  the  fact  that  just  those 
Canaanites  who  lived  in  the  plains  of  Beth-shean 
(Btisan)  and  Jezrcel,  through  which  latter  the 
Kishon  flowed,  had  iron  chariots.  The  name  it- 
self of  Harosheth  Hagojim  suffices  to  suggest  its 
connection  with  iron  chariots.  Harosheth  (Heb. 
Charosheth)  is  the  place  where  iron  was  worked 
(charash,  the  smith).  It  is  only  natural  to  look 
for  it  in  the  plains  just  named.  But  the  residence 
of  Sisera  is  called  Harosheth  Hagojim,  the  Haro- 
sheth of  the  Gojim.  By  Gojim  we  must  understand 
a  race  different  not  only  from  Israel,  but  also  from 
the  Canaanite,  Aram,  Edom,  Moab,  etc.  The 
Targum  translates  Harosheth  Hagojim  by  fortress 

or  city  of  the  Gojim  (S^CCJ?  ^S^S),  and  thus  re- 
fers us  to  Gelil  Hagojim  (Isa.  viii.  23  [E.  V.  ix.  1]), 
which  is  translated  in  the  same  way  (,?"^3  stands 

often  for  Is V,  city).  The  prophet  in  the  passage 
referred  to,  locates  this  Gelil  of  the  Gojim  on  this 
side  of  the  Jordan,  in  the  neighborhood  of  the 
Lake  of  Tiberias.  It  is  clearly  erroneous  to  make 
this  Galiima  Gentium  cover  the  whole  district  of 
Galilee;  for  that  included  Zebulun,  Naphtali,  and 
the  shore  of  Lake  Tiberias,  which  the  prophet 
mentions  separately.  If  it  be  proper  to  interpret 
the  passage  geographically,  Gelil  Hagojim  must 
lie  south  of  Lake  Tiberias,  where  subsequently  Gal- 
ilee began.     Joshua  himself  also  conquered  a  king 

of  the  Gojim  in  "  '2/2  "(Josh.  xii.  23).  From 
the  position  given  to  this  king  in  the  catalogue,  no 
geographical  inference  can  be  drawn,  since  the 
enumeration  is  made  without  any  regard  to  the 
situation  of  localities.     The  passage  U'cumes  clear 

only  when  ^2/3  is  taken  as  Vs  y3,  making 
Joshua  victorious  over  the  king  of  the  Gojim  in 
Gelil.  Sow,  it  cannot  escape  notice  that  among 
the  kings  conquered  by  Joshua,  no  king  of  Beth- 
shean  is  found,  although  in  Josh.  xvii.  16  this 
place  appears  so  important,  and  its  territory  must 
have  been  conquered,  and  although  the  cities  in  the 
plain  of  Jezreel  are  named.  The  conjecture,  there- 
fore, is  plausible  that  Beth-shean  is  represented  by 
the  king  of  the  Gojim.     Beth-shean  was  the  start- 

1  [To  our  author's  identification  of  Harosheth  ha-Gojim 
irith  Beth-shean,  £achmann  objects  that  the  latter  city  is 
mown  by  ifcs  usual  name  to  the  writer  of  Judges;  cf.  ch.  i. 
E7.  He  is  ;t  inclined  to  adopt  the  view  of  Thomson,  The 
Lan'l  and  the  Book,  ch.  xxix.,  who  finds  Harosheth  in  Har- 
thieh,  a  hill  or  mound  at  the  southeastern  corner  of   the 

6 


ing-point  of  the  later  Galilee  (cf.  Lightfoot,  Opera 
i.  216,  etc.)  ;  it  was  the  city  of  iron  chariots  ;  ita 
population  was  always  of  a  mixed  character 
(Canaanites,  Gojim,  Jews,  Judg.  i.  27;  Chulin, 
6  b).  From  the  date  of  the  first  Greek  notices  of 
it  (in  the  Septuagint,  Josephus,  etc. ;  cf.  Ritter, 
xv.  432  [Gage's  Transl.  ii.  335]),  it  appears  undei 
the  name  Seythopolis,  city  of  the  Scythians.  On 
the  qtiestion  how  this  name  originated,  we  are  not 
to  enter  here.  Thus  much  is  certain,  that  it  is  not 
unsuitable  to  take  the  term  Scythians  as  equiva- 
lent to  Gojim;  especially  when  we  compare  Gen. 
xiv.  1,  where  Tidal,  king  of  the  Gojim,  is  named 
in  connection  with  Elam.  Shinar.  and  Ellasar. 
Although  our  historical  data  are  not  sufficient  to 
raise  these  probabilities  to  certainties,  several  con- 
siderations suggested  by  the  narrative  are  of  some 
weight.  If  Harosheth  Hagojim  is  to  be  looked 
for  in  the  vicinity  of  Beth-shean,  the  whole  geog- 
raphy of  the  war  becomes  quite  plain.  Jabin 
and  Sisera  then  occupy  the  decisive  points  at  the 
extremities  of  the  kingdom.  The  southern  army 
of  Sisera  is  the  most  oppressive  to  Israel,  and  it's 
dislodgement  is  the  main  object.  Barak  is  not  to 
attack  Hazor,  for  that  is  surrounded  and  supported 
by  hostile  populations,  which  it  is  impracticable  as 
yet  to  drive  out.  Deborah's  plan  is  to  annihilate 
the  tyrannical  power,  where  it  has  established  itself 
in  the  heart  of  Israel.  Tabor  is  the  central  point, 
where  Naphtali  and  Zebulun  can  conveniently  as- 
semble. A  straight  line  from  Kedesh  to  that  mount, 
runs  through  the  territories  of  both.  Sisera  must 
fight  or  allow  himself  to  be  cut  off.  His  overthrow 
is  Israel's  freedom.  His  army  is  Jabin's  only  hold 
on  those  regions.  Hence,  Sisera's  flight  from  the 
Kishon  is  northward,  in  order  to  reach  Hazor. 
On  the  way,  not  far  from  either  Hazor  or  Kedesh, 
his  fate  overtakes  him.1 

Ver.  4.  And  Deborah  a  prophetic  woman, 
nS^D  nti'S.  According  to  Num.  xi.  25,  the 
prophetic  gift  has  its  source  in  the  "  Spirit  of  Jeho- 
vah." Its  office  answers  to  its  origin  :  it  preaches 
God  and  speaks  his  praises.  Cause  and  effect  tes- 
tify of  each  other.  Every  one,  whether  man  or 
woman,  may  prophecy,  on  whom  the  "  Spirit  of 
Jehovah  "  comes.  The  prophetic  state  is  a  divine 
ecstasy,  a  high  poetic  enthusiasm  ( ivdovo-iafetv, 
from  8e6s),  under  the  influence  of  which  the  praises 
of  God  are  spoken.  On  this  account,  the  prophet 
resembled  at  times  the  Greek  fidi/Tis  (from  ^ucuVojuai)  ; 

compare  especially  Jer.  xxix.  26  (S23;~i:;:i  VIV."^  ; 

CDp,  connected  with  nabi,  in  the  same  chapter 
ver.  8,  is  actually  rendered  jx&vtii  by  the  LXX.). 
In  itself,  however,  both  as  to  derivation  and  mean- 
ing, naba,  niha,  is  to  be  compared  with  eireiv.  The 
prophet  utters  the  tiros,  in  which  the  Spirit  of  Je- 
hovah manifests  itself;  he  declares  the  greatness 
ami  glory  of  God.  He  is  a  spokesman  of  God  and 
for  Him.  Hence  Aaron  could  be  called  the  naht 
of  Moses  (Ex.  vii.  1 ).  He  was  the  ready  organ  of 
the  spirit  which  resided  in  Moses.  Doubtless,  in 
the  highest  sense,  Moses  was  himself  the  nabi 
With  him,  God  spake  mouth  to  mouth,  not  in  vis 
ions  and  dreams  and  enigmas  (Num.  xii.  6-8) ;  not, 
that  is,  as  He  announced  himself  to  Aaron  and 

Plain  of  Akfea,  close  behind  the  hills  that  divide  this  plain 
from  that  of  Jezreel,  on  the  north  side  of  the  Kishon,  yet  so 
near  the  foot  of  Carmel  as  only  to  leave  a  passage  for  the 
river.  This  mound  is  covered  with  the  remains  of  old  ram- 
parts and  buildings."  —  Tb.] 


62 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


Miriam.  Miriam  was  the  first  prophetess  who 
praised  God  in  ecstatic  strains  of  poetry,  with  tim- 
brels and  dances,  before  all  the  people  (Ex.  xv.  20). 
It  has  been  asked  (cf.  my  treatise  Ueber  Prophet- 
innen  und  Zauherinnen  im  Weimar,  Jahrbiich  ftlr 
Deutsche  Sprache,  vol.  iv.),  how  it  comes  about  that 
prophetic  women  constitute  a  "  significant  feature  " 
of  the  old  German  heathenism  only,  whereas  Jew 
ish  and  Christian  views  assigned  the  gift  of  proph- 
ecy to  men.  The  contrast  certainly  exists ;  it  rests 
in  the  main  upon  the  general  difference  between 
the  heathen  and  the  Scriptural  view  of  the  uni- 
verse. The  subjective  nature  of  woman  is  more 
akin  to  the  subjective  character  of  heathenism.  So 
much  the  higher  must  Deborah  be  placed.  She 
was  not,  like  Miriam,  the  sister  of  such  men  as 
Moses  and  Aaron.  The  objective  spirit  of  her  God 
alone  elevates  her  above  her  people,  above  heroes 
before  and  after  her.  Not  only  the  ecstasy  of  en- 
thusiasm, but  the  calm  wisdom  of  that  Spirit  which 
informs  the  law.  dwells  in  her.  Of  no  Judge  until 
Samuel  is  it  expressly  said  that  he  was  a  "  proph- 
et." Of  none  until  him  can  it  be  said,  that  he 
was  possessed  of  the  popular  authority  needful  for 
the  office  of  Judge,  even  before  the  decisive  deed  of 
his  life.  The  position  of  Deborah  iu  Israel  is  there- 
fore a  twofold  testimony.  The  less  commonly 
women  were  called  to  the  office  she  exercised,  the 
more  manifest  is  the  weakness  of  those  who  should 
have  been  the  organs  of  divine  impulses.  That 
she,  a  woman,  became  the  centre  of  the  people, 
proves  the  relaxation  of  spiritual  and  manly  en- 
ergy. But  on  the  other  hand,  the  undying  might 
of  divine  truth,  as  delivered  by  Moses,  comes  brill- 
iantly to  view.  History  shows  many  instances, 
where  in  times  of  distress,  when  men  despaired, 
women  aroused  and  saved  their  nation  ;  but  in  all 
such  cases  there  must  be  an  unextinguished  spark 
of  the  old  fire  in  the  people  themselves.  Israel, 
formerly  encouraged  by  the  great  exploit  of  a  left- 
handed  man,  is  now  quickened  by  the  glowing 
word  of  a  noble  woman. 

The  name  Deborah  does  not  occur  here  for  the 
first  time.  It  was  also  borne  by  the  nurse  of  Re- 
becca, who  was  buried  near  Bethel  (Gen.xxxv.  8). 
Many  find  the  name  peculiarly  appropriate  for  the 
prophetess.  Its  proper  meaning  is,  "bee";  and 
in  Hellenic  oracles  also  bees  play  an  important 
part  (cf.  Paus.  ix.  40,  etc.).  This  honor  they  en- 
joyed, however,  only  in  consequence  of  the  errone- 
ous derivation  of  the  name  melitta  from  melos,  a 

song.     In  like   manner,  Deborah    (n"^3':p,  the 

bee,  is  not  connected  with  dabar  (~I?1J),  to  speak  ; 
nor  does  it  properly  mean  the  "  march  of  the  bees  " 
(Gesenius) ;  neither  is  it  "buzzing"  (Fiirst) ;  but, 
as  melitta  from  meli,  honey,  so  Deborah  is  to  be 

derived  from  debash  (E?3':I),  which  also  means 
honey,  the  interchange  of  r  and  s  being  very  com- 
mon (honor,  honos,  etc.).  Deborah  is  a  female 
name  akin  in  meaning  to  the  German  Emma,1  — 
and  does  not  necessarily  imply  any  reference  to  the 
prophetic  office  in  the  case  of  our  Deborah  any 
more  than  in  that  of  Rebecca's  nurse. 

A  woman  of  a  fiery  spirit,  iTn^Sj  f?P^?- 
The  majority  of  expositors,  ancient  as  well  as 
modern,  regard  Lapidoth  as  the  name  of  Debo- 
rah's husband.  Yet  it  was  felt  by  many  that  there 
was  something  peculiar  in  the  words.     If  the  ordi- 


nary interpretation  were  the  true  one,  it  would  r* 
natural  to  look  also  for  a  statement  of  the  tribe  to 
which  the  husband  belonged.  In  accordance  \\i:li 
the  style  of  the  ancients,  the  designation  would 
have  been  at  least  once  repeated  (at  eh.  v.  I).  To 
make  it  seem  quite  natural  for  Deborah  always  to 
appear  without  her  husband,  it  had  to  be  assumed 
that  he  was  already  dead.  To  avoid  this,  some  old 
Jewish  expositors  assert  that  Barak  was  her  hus- 
band, —  Barak  and  Lappid  being  of  kindred  signifi- 
cation, namely,  "  lightning  "  and  "flame."  But 
in  all  this  no  attention  is  paid  to  the  uncommon- 
ness  of  the  phenomenon  presented  in  the  person  of 
a  woman  such  as  Deborah.  What  a  burning 
spirit  must  hers  have  been,  to  have  attained  to  such 
distinction  in  Israel !  It  was  in  perfect  keeping 
with  the  poetical  cast  of  the  language  of  the  age, 
that  the  people  should  seek  to  indicate  the  charac- 
teristic which  gave  her  her  power  over  them,  by 

calling  her  niTEv  DtPM.  If  a  capable  woman 
was  called  Vn  HIT'S,  from  V/l,  strength  (Prov 
xxxi.  10),  —  and  a  contentious  woman,  i"WS 
D'OVjn  (Prov.  xxi.  19)  ;  and  if  in  D-lV©?  ntt'S 
(foolish  woman,  Prov.  ix.  13),  we  are  not  to  regard 
Icesiluth  as  a  proper  name,  it  must  also  be  allowed 

that  m"PQy  ftPS  may  be  rendered  "  woman 
of  the  torch-glow,"  especially  when  we  consider 
what  a  fire-bearing,  life-kindling  personage  she 
was.  It  is  a  fact,  moreover,  that  lappid  (torch) 
occurs  almost  as  often  in  figurative  as  in  literal 
language.  The  salvation  of  Jerusalem  shines 
"  like  a  torch  "  (Isa.  lxii.  1).  "  Out  of  his  mouth 
torches  go  forth"  (Job  xli.  11  (19)).  The  appear- 
ance of  the  heroes  of  Israel  is  "  like  torches  " 
(Nah.  ii.  5  (4)).  The  angel  who  appeared  to 
Daniel  had  "eyes  like  torches  of  fire"  (Dan.  x. 
6).  "The  word  of  Elias,"  says  Sirach  (xlviii.  1), 
"burned  like  a  torch."  Concerning  Phinehas, 
the  priest,  the  Midrash  says,  that  "  when  the  Holy 
Ghost  filled  him,  his  countenance  glowed  like 
torches"  (Jalkut,  Judges,  §  40). 

The  spirit  of  Deborah  was  like  a  torch  for  Israel, 
kindling  their  languid  hearts.  It  was  the  power 
of  her  prophetic  breath  which  fell  on  the  people. 
This  is  the  secret  of  her  influence  and  victory. 
The  moral  energy  which  was  at  work  is  traced  to 
its   source  even  in  the  grammatical  form  of  the 

word  which  describes  it  —  fTlTB?,  not  DH^B?,* 

albeit  that  the  former,  like  jTI^DS  occurs  but  once. 
She  judged  Israel.  Inasmuch  as  in  the  gift  of 
prophecy  she  had  the  Spirit  of  God,  she  was  able 
to  judge.  Notwithstanding  her  rapt  and  flaming 
spirit,  she  was  no  fanatic.  She  judged  the  throng- 
ing people  according  to  the  principles  of  the  law. 
The  wisdom  of  this  "  wise  woman  "  was  the  wis- 
dom revealed  by  God  in  his  law.      She  deals  in  no 

mysterious  and  awful  terrors.  The  DQtpO  (judg- 
ment), for  which  Israel  came  to  Deborah,  was  cleur 
—  did  not  consist  in  dark  sayings,  like  the  verses 
of  the  Pythia,  though  these  also  were  called  Bc/xta- 

Tit,  flexures  (statutes,  D^Sttia  >  cf.  Nagelsbach, 
Nachhom.  Theoloyie,  p.  183).  The  comparisot: 
with  the  Sphinx,  instituted  by  Bochart  (Phaleg,  p 
471 ),  was  not  fortunate  ;  not  even  according  to  the 
notions  of  the  grammarian  Socrates,  who  repre 


1  [From   the  same   root   with   emsig,   industrious,   and    and  therefore  the  word  which  figuratively  characterizes  it. 
4mri&',  emmet,  ant  — Ta.]  has,  by  a  sort  of  attraction,    a    feminine,    pot     nasculini 

a  [That  if,  apparently,  the  energy  proceeds  from  a  woman,    plural  given  it.  —  Ta.l 


CHAPTER  IV.   1-11 


83 


sented  the  Sphinx  as  a  native  soothsayer,  who  oc- 
casioned much  harm  because  the  Thebans  did  not 
understand  her  statutes  (cf.  Jaep,  Die  griechische 
Sphinx,  p.  15). 

Ver.  5.  She  sat  under  the  palm-tree  of  Deb- 
orah. Under  the  palm  still  known  to  the  narrator 
as  that  of  Deborah  (cf.  "  Luther's  oak,"  in  Thiirin- 
gia).  It  is  impossible  to  see  why  C.  Botticher 
[Ueber  den  Baumhtltus  der  Hellenen,  p.  523)  should 
■peak  of  "  Deborah-palms."  She  sat  under  a  large 
palm,  public  and  free,  accessible  to  all ;  not  like 
the  German  Velleda,  who,  according  to  Tacitus, 
sat  in  a  tower,  and  to  whom  no  one  was  admitted, 
in  order  to  increase  the  veneration  in  which  she 
was  held.  The  palm  was  the  common  symbol  of 
all  Canaan ;  it  adorned  the  coins  of  both  the  Phoe- 
nicians (Movers,  ii.  1,  7)  and  the  Jews.1  From 
these  coins,  carried  far  and  wide  by  sailors  —  and 
not,  as  is  generally  assumed,  from  the  appearance 
of  the  coast  when  approached  from  sea,  which 
showed  many  other  things  besides  palm-trees,— 
arose  the  custom  of  calling  those  who  brought 
them  Phoenicians  (<po7vi£,  the  palm).  The  symbol- 
ism of  the  palm,  which  the  ancients  admired  in 
Delos,  was  based  on  ideas  which  were  unknown  to 
Israel.  It  referred  to  the  birth  of  Apollo,  not  to 
divination. 

Between  ha-Ramah  and  Beth-el,  on  Mount 
Ephraim.'"  Beth-el  lay  on  the  border  between 
Ephraim  and  Benjamin ;  so  likewise  Ataroth 
(Josh.  xvi.  2).  Robinson  discovered  an  Atara  in 
that  region  [Bibl.  Res.,  i.  575).  Not  far  from  it,  he 
came  to  a  place,  called  er-Ram,  lying  on  a  high 
hill,  which  he  regarded  as  the  Raman  in  Benjamin 
(Judg.  xix.  13),  while  Ritter  (xvi.  537,  538 
[Gage's  Transl.  iv.  230]),  identifies  it  with  the 
Raman  of  our  passage.  Both  conjectures  are  ten- 
able, since  neither  interferes  with  the  statement 
that  Deborah  sat  between  Beth-el  and  Ramah,  on 
Mount  Ephraim,  —  on  the  border,  of  course,  like 

Bethel  itself  (cf  "'v't'  Josh-  xvi-  ')• 

Vers.  6,  7.  And  she  sent  and  called  Barak 
out  of  Kedesh-naphtali.  That  which  especially 
comes  to  view  here,  is  the  moral  unity  in  which  the 
tribes  still  continued  to  be  bound  together.  Debo- 
rah, though  resident  in  the  south  of  Ephraim,  had 
Iter  eyes  fixed  on  the  tyranny  which  pressed  espe- 
cially on  the  tribes  of  the  north.  While  of  the 
priests  at  Shiloh  none  speak,  she  nevertheless  can- 
not rest  while  Israel  is  in  bondage.  But  she  turns 
to  the  tribes  most  immediately  concerned.  Kedesh, 
to  the  northwest  of  Lake  Huleh,  has  been  identified 
in  modern  times,  still  bearing  its  old  name.  It  is 
situated  upon  a  rather  high  ridge,  in  a  splendid 
region  (Rob.  iii.  366  flf.).  There,  in  Naphtali,  lived 
Barak  ("  lightning,"  like  Barcas),  the  man  fixed 
on  by  Deborah  to  become  the  liberator  of  his  peo- 
ple. The  names  of  his  father  and  native  place  are 
carefully  given,  here,  and  again  at  ch.  v.  1.  The 
power  of  Deborah's  influence  shows  itself  in  the 
fact  that  Barak,  though  living  so  far  north,  readily 
answers  her  summons  to  the  border  of  Benjamin. 
At  the  same  time,  Barak's  obedience  to  the  call  of 
the  prophetess,  is  in  itself  good  evidence,  that  he 
is  the  called  deliverer  of  Israel.  But  she  not  only 
calls  him,  not  only  incites  him  to  the  conflict ;  she 

l  [Stanley  (Jewish  Church,  i.  352} :  "  On  the  coins  of  the 
Roman  Empire,  Judaea  is  represented  as  a  woman  seated 
under  a  palm-tree,  captive  and  weeping.  It  is  the  contrast 
of  that  figure  which  will  best  place  before  us  the  character 
and  call  of  Deborah.  It  is  the  same  Judaean  palm  under 
whose  shadow  she  eits,  but  not  with  downcast  eyes,  and 
folded  handi,  and  •zttns^ushed  hop**  ,  with  all  the  fire  of 


also  gives  him  the  plan  of  battle  which  he  must 
follow. 

Go,  and  gradually  draw  toward  Mount  Tabor, 
with  ten  thousand  men  of  Naphtali  and  Zebu- 

lun  era?  ^npbi  "Ton  "in?  n?tr»i  Tib). 

The  word  '=1?'^  always  conveys  the  idea  of  draw 
ing,  whether  that  which  is  drawn  be  the  bow,  the 
furrow,  or  the  prolonged  sounds  of  a  musical  in.-tru- 
ment;  tropically,  it  is  also  used  of  the  long  line  of 
an  army,  advancing  along  the  plain.  Its  meaning 
here,  where  the  object  which  Barak   is  to  draw  i- 

put  in  another  clause,  "  '"HJPS  19^  WO"^1;, 
is  made  plain  by  the  analogous  passage,  Ex.  xii 
21.     There  Moses  says,  7&>*   Q?b   Tl^  WIpO 

Op^nnStpnb ;  and  the  sense  is  evidently  that 
the  families  are  to  sacrifice  the  passover  one  after 
another  (•"OttJO),  each  in  its  turn  killing  its  own 
lamb.  The  same  successive  method  is  here  en- 
joined by  Deborah.  Barak  is  to  gather  ten  thou- 
sand men  toward  mount  Tabor,  one  after  another, 
in  small  squads.  This  interpretation  of  the  word 
is  strengthened  by  the  obvious  necessity  of  the 
case.  The  tyrant  must  hear  nothing  of  the  rising, 
until  the  hosts  are  assembled  ;  but  how  can  their 
movements  be  concealed,  unless  they  move  in  small 
companies  ?  For  the  same  reason  they  are  to 
assemble,  not  at  Kedesh,  but  at  a  central  point, 
readily  accessible  to  the  several  tribes.  Mount 
Tabor  (JeM  Tor),  southwest  of  the  Sea  of  Tibe- 
rias, is  the  most  isolated  point  of  Galilee,  rising  in 
the  form  of  a  cone  above  the  plain,  and  visible  at  a 
great  distance,  though  its  height  is  only  1755 
(according  to  Schubert,  1748)  Par.  feet.3  Barak, 
however,  is  not  to  remain  in  his  position  on  the 
mountain.  If  Sisera's  tyranny  is  to  be  broken,  its 
forces  must  be  defeated  in  the  plain  ;  for  there  the 
iron  chariots  of  the  enemy  have  their  field  of  action. 
Hence,  Deborah  adds  that  Sisera  will  collect  his 
army  at  the  brook  Kishon.  in  the  plain  of  Jezreel. 
"  And  I  "  —  she  speaks  in  the  "  Spirit  of  Jeho- 
vah "  —  "  will  draw  him  unto  thee,  and  deliver 
him  into  thine  hand." 

Ver.  8.  And  Barak  said.  Barak  has  no  doubt 
as  to  the  truth  of  her  words,  nor  does  he  fear  the 
enemy  ;  but  yet  he  will  go  only  if  Deborah  go  with 
him,  not  without  her.  Her  presence  legitimatizes 
the  undertaking  as  divine.  It  shows  the  tribes  he 
summons,  that  he  seeks  no  interest  of  his  own  — 
that  it  is  she  who  summons  them.  He  wishes  to 
stand  forth  as  the  executor  merely  of  the  command 
which  comes  through  her.  The  attempt  to  draw 
a  parallel  between  Deborah  and  Jeanne  d'Arc, 
though  it  readily  suggests  itself,  will  only  teach  us 
to  estimate  the  more  clearly  the  peculiar  character 
of  the  Jewish  prophetess.  The  latter  does  not  her- 
self draw  the  sword,  for  then  she  would  not  have 
needed  Barak.  Joan,  like  Deborah,  spoke  preg- 
nant words  of  truth,  as  when,  on  being  told  that 
"  God  could  conquer  without  soldiers,"  she  simply 
replied,  "  the  soldiers  will  fight,  and  then  God  wifl 
give  victory ; "  but  she  fought  only  against  the 
enemies  of  her  country,  not  the  enemies  of  her 
faith  and  spiritual  life.     It  was  a  romantic  faith  in 

faith  and  energy,  eager  for  the  battle,  confident  of  the  vic- 
tory." —  Te.] 

2  The  rendering  of  the  Targum  here  is  quite  remarkable 
"  And  she  sat  in  the  city,  in  Ataroth  Deborah." 

8  Cf.  Ritter,  IV  393  [Pages  Transl.  ii.  311  ;  also  Rob.  ii 
351  ff.] 


84 


THE  BOOR  OF  JUDGES. 


the  right  and  truth  of  an  earthly  sseptre,  for  which 
the  poor  maiden  fell :  the  voice  which  called  Debo- 
rah to  victory  was  the  voice  of  the  Universal  Sove- 
reign. No  trace  of  sentimentalism,  like  that  of 
Dunois,  can  be  discovered  in  Barak;  neverthe- 
less, he  voluntarily  retires  behind  the  authority 
of  a  woman,  because  God  animates  and  inspires 
her. 

Vers.  9,  10.  She  said:  the  expedition  on 
which  thou  goest,  shall  not  be  for  thine  hon- 
our ;  for  Jehovah  will  give  Sisera  into  the 
hand  of  a  woman.  The  victory  will  be  ascribed, 
not  to  Barak,  but  to  Deborah.  It  will  be  said, 
"  a  woman  conquered  Sisera."  This  is  the  first 
»nd  obvious  meaning  of  the  words ; '  by  the  deed 
of  Jael  they  were  fulfilled  in  yet  another  sense. 
The  honor  of  hewing  down  Sisera  did  not  fall 
to  Barak.  Nevertheless,  Barak  insists  on  his  con- 
dition. He  will  have  the  conflict  sanctified  by  her 
presence.  Something  similar  appears  in  Greek 
tradition  :  with  reference  to  a  battle  in  the  Messe- 
nian  war  it  is  said  (Pans.  iv.  16),  that "  the  soldiers 
fought  bravely,  because  their  Seers  were  present," 

And  Deborah  arose,  and  went  with  Barak 
to  Kedesh.  For  the  sake  of  the  great  national 
cause,  she  leaves  her  peaceful  palm ;  and  by  her 
readiness  to  share  in  every  danger,  evidences  the 
truth  of  her  announcements.  Kedesh,  Barak's 
home,  is  the  place  from  which  directions  are  to  be 
issued  to  the  adjacent  tribes.  Thither  she  accom- 
panies him ;  and  thence  he  sends  out  his  call  to 
arms.  Some  authority  for  this  purpose,  he  must 
have  had  long  before  :  it  is  now  supported  by  the 
sanction  of  the  prophetess.  When  it  is  said,  that 
he  "  called  Zebulun  and  Naphtali  to  Kedesh,"  it  is 
evident  that  only  the  leaders  are  intended.  It 
cannot  be  supposed  that  the  troops,  in  whole  or  in 
part,  were  first  marched  up  to  Kedesh,  and  then 
back  again,  southward,  to  Tabor.  In  Kedesh,  he 
imparts  the  plan  to  the  heads  of  families.  Led  by 
these,  the  troops  collect,  descending  on  all  sides 
from  their  mountains,  like  the  Swiss  against  Aus- 
tria,   and   proceed    towards    Tabor  —  "  on   foot " 

O^^1^'  *or  tneT  naTe  neither  chariots  nor  cav- 
alry. Their  numbers  constantly  augment,  till  they 
arrive  on  Tabor,  —  Barak  and  Deborah  always 
at  their  head. 

Ver.  1 1 .  And  Heber,  the  Kenite,  had  sev- 
ered himself  from  Kain,  the  sons  of  Hobab, 
the  brother-in-law  of  Moses.  We  read  above 
that  the  tribe  of  the  Kenite,  the  father-in-law  of 
Moses,  decamped  from  Jericho  with  the  tribe  of 
Judah  (eh.  i.  16),  and,  while  the  latter  carried  on 
the  war  of  conquest,  settled  in  Arad.  From  there 
the  family  of  Heber  has  separated  itself.  While 
one  part  of  the  tribe  has  sought  a  new  home  for 
itself  below,  in  the  extreme  south  of  Judah,  the 
other  encamps  high  up,  in  the  territory  of  Naph- 
tali. It  is  as  if  the  touching  attachment  of  this 
people  to  Israel  still  kept  them  located  at  the 
extremities  of  the  Israelitish  encampment,  in  order, 

1  [This  is  the  first  and  obvious  meaning  of  the  words, 
and  it  is  very  strange  that  Bachinauu  should  pronounce 
this  interpretation,  from  which  but  for  Jael  no  one  would 
ever  have  dreamed  of  departing,  impossible.  —  Tr.] 

2  In  giving  Jethro  seven  names,  homiletical  applications 
were  followed.  Thus,  Hobab  was  taken  as  a  surname  of 
Jethro,  "  because  he  was  dear  to  God."  (Jalkut,  Judges^ 
0.38.) 

8  To  pitch  one's  tent  (t  in  the  vicinity  "  of  a  place,  is 

expressed  by  IV  ;  so  here,  ^17W  IV  •   loGen.xxxviii.  1, 

>Khiy  trrN--fx?. 


|  as  of  old,  to  show  them  the  way.  Above,  ch.  i.  16 
1  they  are  called  "  sons  of  the  Kenite,  the  father-in 
law  of  Moses";  here,  "  Kain  (cf.  Num.  xxiv.  22) 
the  sons  of  Hobab,  the  brother-in-law  of  Moses.' 
Ancient  expositions  -  have  been  the  occasion  of 
unnecessary  confusion  as  to  Jethro's  name.  )i~in 
means  to  contract  affinity  by  marriage  ;  and,  just 
as  in  German  Schwiiher  (father-in-law)  and  Sc/iwa- 
ger  (brother-in-law)  are  at  bottom  one,  so  the  He- 
brew "\!y^r\  may  stand  for  both  father-in-law  and 
brother-in-law.  The  father-in-law  of  Moses  was 
Jethro ;  as  priest,  he  was  called  Reuel  ( 7SW1). 
He  did  not  accompany  Israel,  but  after  his  visit  to 
Moses,  went  back  to  his  own  land  (Ex.  xviii.  27). 
His  son  Hobab,  however  (Num.  x.  29),  had  re- 
mained with  Israel ;  and  when  he  also  would  return 
home,  Moses  entreated  him  to  abide  with  them, 
that  he  might  be  for  eyes  to  them  on  the  way,  and 
promised  him  a  share  in  whatever  good  might  he 
in  store  for  Israel.  The  proposal  was  accepted, 
and  the  promise  was  kept.  In  the  north  and  south 
of  Canaan,  the  Kenites  had  their  seats.  The} 
are  here  designated  "  sons  of  Hobab,"  because  it 
was  from  him,  the  ancient  guide  of  Israel,  that 
they  derived  their  position  in  the  land.  Heber's 
tent  was  in  the  vicinity  of  Kedesh,  near  Elon 
Zaananuim,3  mentioned  also  at  Josh.  xix.  33,  as  a 
place  on  the  border  of  Naphtali.  The  name  may 
have  originated  from  the  sojourn  of  the  Kenites  ;  a 
supposition  which  becomes  necessary,  if  with  an 
eye  t<j  Isa.  xxxiii.  20,4  it  be  interpreted  to  mean 
the  "  oak  of  the  wandering  tent."  ° 

HOMILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

Compare  the  reflections  at  the  end  of  the  next 
section. 

[Bishop  Hall  :  It  is  no  wonder  if  they,  who, 
ere  fourscore  days  after  the  law  delivered,  fell  to 
idolatry  alone  ;  now,  after  four-score  years  since 
the  law  restored,  fell  to  idolatry  among  the  Ca- 
naanites.  Peace  could  in  a  snorter  time  work 
looseness  in  any  people.  And  if  forty  years  after 
Othniel's  deliverance  they  relapsed,  what  marvel 
is  it,  that  in  twice  forty  years  after  Ehud  they 
thus  miscarried  i  —  The  same  :  Deborah  had 
been  no  prophetess,  if  she  durst  have  sent  in  her 
own  name :  her  message  is  from  Him  that  sent  her- 
self. "  Hath  not  the  Lord  God  of  Israel  com- 
manded '.'  "  Barak's  answer  is  faithful,  though 
conditional ;  and  doth  not  so  much  intend  a  re- 
fusal to  go  without  her,  as  a  necessary  bond  of  her 
presence  with  him.  Who  can  blame  him,  that  he 
would  have  a  prophetess  in  his  company  !  If  the 
man  had  not  been  as  holy  as  valiant,  he  would  not 
have  wished  such  society.  —  The  same:  To 
prescribe  that  to  others,  whieh  we  draw  back  from 
doing  ourselves,  is  an  argument  of  hollowuess  and 
falsity.     Barak  shall  see  that  Deborah  doth  not 

4  [Where,  according  to  De  Wette's  translation,  Jerusalem 
is  spoken  of  as  a  "  Zelt  das  nichl  wandert  "  —  a  tent  that 
does  not  wander.  —  Tr.] 

5  The    reading    Spvbs    TrteoveKTOvVTui;    found  in    some 

Greek  versions,  expounds  2*333?  —  as  if  it  came  from 
37*|2  ;  while  the  avanavonevi>iv  of  other  versions  give?  tl 
the  sense  of  ]  JSCT,  which  is  so  rendered,  Jer.  j  Iviii.  11 


CHAPTER   IV.    12-24. 


85 


offer  him  that  cup  whereof  she  dares  not  begin  : 
without  regard  of  her  sex,  she  marches  with  him 
to  Mount  Tabor,  and  rejoices  to  be  seen  of  the  ten 
thousand  of  Israel.  —  Hexgstenberg  (  Genuine- 
ness of  the  Pentateuch,  ii.  101)  :  To  grant  succor 
through  a  woman  was  calculated  to  raise  heaven- 
wards the  thoughts  of  men,  which  are  so  prone  to 
cleave  to  the  earth.  If  the  honor  was  due  to  God 
alone,  they  would  be  more  disposed  to  show  their 
gratitude  by  sincere  conversion.  That  Barak  was 
obliged  to  lean  on  Deborah,  depended  on  the  same 


law  by  which  Gideon  was  chosen  to  be  the  deliv 
erer  of  Israel  from  the  Midianites,  though  his  fam  ■ 
ily  was  the  meanest  in  Manasseh.  and  himself  the 
youngest  in  his  father's  house  ;  that  law  by  which 
Gideon  was  divinely  directed  to  take  only  three 
hundred  men  from  the  whole  assembled  host ;  the 
women  Deborah  and  Jael  stand  in  the  same  cate- 
gory with  the  ox-goad  of  Shamgar.  In  all  ages 
God  is  pleased  to  choose  for  his  service  the  in 
considerable  and  the  despised.  —  Tr.] 


The  Battle  of  the  Kishon.     Sisera,  defeated,  seeks  shelter  in  the  tent  of  Jael,  wife  of 
Heber  the  Kenite,  and  is  slain  by  her. 

Chapter  IV.     12-24. 

12  And  they  shewed  Sisera  that  Barak  the  son  of  Abinoam  was  gone  up  to  Mount 

13  Tabor.  And  Sisera  gathered  [called]  together  all  his  chariots  [his  whole  chariot- 
force],  even  nine  hundred  chariots  of  iron,  and  all  the  people  that  were  with  him,  from 
Haroshetli  of  the  Gentiles  [Harosheth   Hagojim]  unto  the  river  [brook]  of   Kishon. 

14  And  Deborah  said  unto  Barak,  Up ;  for  this  is  the  day  in  which  the  Lord  [Jehovah] 
hath  delivered  [delivereth]  Sisera  into  thine  hand :  is  [doth]  not  the  Lord  [Je- 
hovah] gone  [go]  out  before  thee  ?     So  Barak  went  down  from  Mount  Tabor,  and 

15  ten  thousand  men  after  him.  And  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  discomfited  [confounded] 
Sisera,  and  all  his  [the]  chariots,  and  all  his  [the]  host,  with  the  edge  of  the  sword  ' 
before  Barak ;  so  that  [and]   Sisera  lighted  down  off  his  chariot,  and   fled  away  on 

16  his  feet.  But  [And]  Barak  pursued  after  the  chariots,  and  after  the  host,  unto 
Harosheth  of  the  Gentiles  [Harosheth   Hagojim]:  and  all  the   host  of  Sisera  fell 

17  upon  [by]  the  edge  of  the  sword;  and  there  was  not  a  man  left.  Howbeit,  Sisera 
fled 2  away  on  his  feet  to  the  tent  of  Jael  the  wife  of  Heber  the  Kenite  :  for  there  was 

18  peace  between  Jabin  the  king  of  Hazor  and  the  house  of  Heber  the  Kenite.  And 
Jael  went  out  to  meet  Sisera.  and  said  unto  him.  Turn  in,  my  lord,  turn  in  to  me  ;  fear 
not.    And  when  he  had  turned  [And  he  turned]  in  unto  her  into  the  tent,  [and]  she 

19  covered  him  with  a  mantle.3  And  he  said  unto  her.  Give  me.  I  pray  thee,  a  little  water 
to  drink  ;  for  I  am  thirsty.    And  site  opened  a  bottle  of  milk  [the  milk-skin],  and  gavf 

20  him  drink,  and  covered  him.  Again  [And]  he  said  unto  her.  Stand  in  the  door  of 
the  tent,  and  it  shall  be,  when  any  man  doth  come  and  inquire  of  thee,  and  say.  Is 

21  there  any  man  here  ?  that  thou  shalt  say,  No.  Then  [And]  Jael  Heber's  wife  took 
a  nail  of  the  tent  [the  tent-pin],  and  took  an  [the]  hammer  in  her  hand,  and  went 
softly  unto  him,  and  smote  [drove]  the  nail  [pin]  into  his  temples,  and  fastened  it 
[and  it  pressed   through]  into  the  ground :  for  he  was  fast  asleep,  and  weary.     So 

22  he  died.4  And  behold,  as  [omit :  as]  Barak  pursued  Sisera,  [and]  Jael  cam*  out 
[went]  to  meet  him,  and  said  unto  him.  Come,  and  I  will  shew  thee  the  man  whom 
thou  seekest.     And  when  he  came  into  her  tent,  behold,  Sisera  lay  dead,  and  the 

23  nail   [pin]  was  in  his  temples.     So  God  subdued   on  that  day  Jabin  the   king  of 

24  Canaan  before  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel.  And  the  hand  of  the  children  [sons] 
of  Israel  prospered,  and  prevailed  [grew  continually  heavier]  against  Jabin  the  king 
of  Canaan,  until  they  had  destroyed  Jabin  king  of  Canaan. 


TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  15.  —  ^*^n->D  V.     Standing  in  connection  with     DrTs1,    these  words  are  of  somewhat  difficult  interpreta- 

v  .    :  T  t-7 

rion.     Dr.  Cassel's  rejection  of  them  will  not  commend  itself  to  most  critics  ;  nor  is  the  provisional  translation  he  givei 

of  them,  "in  the  conflict,''  exactly  clear.      The  best  view  is  probably  that  of  Bachmann,  that  the  expression  denotes  the 

peat  operative  cause  by  which  Jehovah  confounded  the  enemy.       Barak's  men,  rushiug  down  from   the  mountain,  and 


86 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


idling  suddenly  on  the  hosts  of  Sisera,  cutting  down  with  remorseless  sword  all  that  stood  in  their  way,  threw  the  enemj 
,nto  utter  confusion  ;  but  the  effect  is  rightly  ascribed  to  Jehovah)  from  whose  Spirit  both  the  impulse  and  the  strength  u 
execute  proceeded.  —  Ta.] 

[i  Ver.  17.  —  Dr.  Cassel  translates  by  the  pluperfect :  "  had  fled, "  cf.  below.  But  it  seems  better  to  retain  *.ue  indefi* 
nite  perfect.  The  narrative  left  Sisera  for  a  moment,  in  order  in  ver.  16  briefly  to  indicate  the  fate  of  the  arm} ,  but  now 
returns  to  him.    Cf.  1  Kgs.  xx.  30,  and  many  similar  instances.  —  Ta.J 

[3  Ver.  18.  —  nD^DH?.  This  word  means  a  "covering ;  "  but  exactly  what  sortof  covering  is  uncertain.  Dr.  Cassel 
translates  here  by  Kezcnluch,  raincloth,  perhaps  to  indicate  its  close,  impervious  texture.  Br.  Bachmaun  thinks  it  was 
r(  probably  a  rather  large  covering  or  mat  of  thick,  soft  material  (perhaps  skin  or  goat's-hair),  on  which  a  person  lay  down 
and  in  which  he  at  the  same  time  wrapped  himself  up,  —  a  sort  of  mattrass  and  coverlet  in  one.     Similar  articles  still 

form   part  of  the   furniture   of  the    Bedouin's  tent  and  the   Fellah's  dwelling."'     He  derives  the  word  from    T|  r  C  = 

7TTDD,  in  its  usual  sense  to  support,  to  leaD,  specifically  to  recline  at  table.  Accordingly  the  proper  meaning  of  the 
word  would  be  r  supporting ; "  then,  concretely,  that  which  supports  or  serves  to  recline  upon.  —  Tr.] 

[4  Ver.  21.  —  Dr.  Cassel  :  f[  and  he  —  for  weariness  he  had  fallen  fast  asleep  —  died."'  Keil :  ff  Now  he  was  falleo  into 
r  deep  sleep,  and  was  wearied  (i.  e.  from  weariness  he  had  fallen   fast  asleep) ;  and  so  he   died."'     Similarly  Bacbmauu. 

The  clause  S*li~n  —  P]3?*T  is  manifestly  designed  to  set  forth  the  circumstances  which  enabled  Jael  to  approach  Sisera 
unperceived  ;  consequently,  the  H  for  "  of  the  English  version  is  perfectly  proper,  and  formally  not  less  correct  than  Dr. 
Cassel's  German,  which  was  only  designed  to  correct  Luther's  version  :  ■'  he  however,  fell  asleep,  swooned  away,  and 
died."  Dr.  Wordsworth  (p.  99)  considers  it  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  Jael  "smote  a  nail  into  Siaera's  head  while  he  was 
asleep."  He  would  render  :  "and  he  fell  down  astounded,  and  fainted  away,  and  died."  The  passage  is  a  curiosity  in 
interpretation.  —  Ta.] 


EXEGETIUAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Intensely  vivid  pictures,  and  of  the  highest  his- 
torical clearness,  are  drawn  in  these  simple  sen- 
tences. The  reader  is  conducted,  in  imagination, 
into  the  tumult  of  the  battle,  and  stands  horror- 
stricken  in  the  tent  of  Jael. 

Ver.  12.  And  they  told  Sisera.  Jabin  was 
in  Hazor,  Sisera  in  Harosheth  Hagojim.  Since 
the  tidings  from  Tabor  come  to  Sisera,  he  must 
have  been  near  the  scene  of  action ;  whilst  Jabin 
appears  to  be  at  a  distance  from  all  the  events  nar- 
rated. 

Vers.  13,  14.     And  he  called  together,  p?T*]. 

PPJ  means  properly,  to  cry;  here,  as  in  ver.  10, 
to  assemble  by  crying,  Kripirreiv  :  he  mobilizes  the 
troops  quartered  round  about.  Everything  revolves 
about  Sisera.  He  is  the  prominent,  controlling 
personage  ;  commander,  probably,  of  the  mercena- 
ries, who  on  account  of  their  mixed '  character, 
were  also  perhaps  called  Gojim.  The  chariots, 
which  Sisera  orders  to  be  sent  to  the  brook  Kishon, 
must  already  have  been  in  the  plain,  since  other- 
wise they  could  not  have  been  transported.  Their 
head-quarters  cannot  have  been  anywhere  else  than 
at  Beisan,  where  at  the  same  time  they  commanded 
the  best  chariot  and  cavalry  roads  to  the  country 
beyond  the  Jordan.  The  plain  of  Jezreel  to  which 
he  conducts  them,  is  ground  on  which  his  army 
can  properly  unfold  itself.  He  leads  them  to  the 
southwest  side  of  Tabor,  where  the  mountain 
shows  its  greatest  depression.  It  must  have  been 
his  intention,  in  case  Barak  did  not  attack,  to  sur- 
round him  on  the  mountain,  and  thus  compel  him 
to  descend  into  the  valley.  But  before  the  terrible 
chariot-force  has  well  arranged  itself,  the  Israel- 
itish  army,  fired  with  divine  enthusiasm  by  Deb- 
orah, and  led  by  Barak,  charges  down  on  the 
flanks  of  the  enemy,  and  breaks  up  their  battle 
ranks.  Everything  is  thrown  into  confusion  — 
panic  terrors  ensue, — everything  turns  to  flight. 
die  great  captain  has  lost  his  head ;  of  all   his 

1  According  to  Ezekiel  (ch.  xxvii.  10),  Paras,  Lud.  and 
Phut,  were  in  the  army  of  the  king  of  Tyre,  as  mercenaries. 
The  same  prophet  (ch.  xxxviii.  5),  addressing  Gog,  implies 
that  he  had  Paras,  Cush,  and  Phut,  in  his  service.  It  is 
Mrtainly  more  reasonable  to  think  of  the  Assyrian  Cush 
(Cossaeans)  as  connected  with  the  army  of  Gog,  than  of  the 
African.  In  place  of  Gog  and  Magog,  an  ancient  interpre- 
tation   already  puts   Cimmerians  and  Scythians.     In  like 


strategic  plans  nothing  remains ;  only  presence  of 
mind  enough  is  left  him  to  seek  salvation  from 
destruction  by  not  fleeing  in  his  chariot,  nor  with 
the  others. 

Vers.  15-24.  And  Jehovah  confounded  them 
Deborah  had  promised  that  God  would  no  before 
them  —  as  He  went  before  Joshua,  not  visibly  as 
an  angel  (as  the  Targum  has  it),  but  in  the  might 
of  his  Spirit,  which  He  puts  upon  his  heroes.  It 
is  by  that  quickening  Spirit  that,  in  their  charge 
from  the  height,  Barak  becomes  lightning,  and 
Deborah  a  torch,  by  which  the  enemy  is  consumed. 

CrPI,  •'  He  confounded  them,"  as  He  confounded 
the  host  of  the  Egyptians  (Ex.  xiv.  24).  When 
confusion  enters  the  ranks  of  the  chariots,  all  is 
lost.  They  are  then  worse  than  useless.  God  did 
this,  that  Israel  might  conquer. 

In  the  conflict.  2"JH",27.  This  is  the  only 
meaning  which  these  words  can  have,  if  they  prop- 
erly belong  here.  In  that  case,  however,  the  phrase- 
ology S'irPE1?  ....  ErPI  is  peculiar, 
and  admits  only  of  an  artificial  explanation.  Ber- 
|  theau's  idea,  that  God  is  represented  as  a  cham- 
pion hero  with  his  sword,  is  altogether  inadmissible. 

To  me  it  seems  likely  that  2"':rP',p7  did  not 
originally  stand  here  at  all,  but  slipped  in  from  ver. 
16,  an  error  easily  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that 

the  next  word,  *?-?,  begins  with  the  same  letters. 

And  Sisera  lighted  down  off  his  chariot.  Be- 
cause on  that  he  was  likely  to  he  recognized.  The 
bulk  of  the  army,  on  account  of  the  chariots,  can 
only  flee  along  the  plain,  back  to  Harosheth, 
whence  they  advanced.  Sisera  takes  to  his  feet, 
in  order  to  escape  by  other  roads.  He  fore- 
sees that  Barak  will  pursue  the  army,  and  look 
for  him  there.  Therefore  he  secretly  flees  in 
a  northern  direction  towards  Hazor ;  and  gains 
thereby  at  all  events  the  advantage  that  Barak 
seeks  him  in  the  other  direction,  towards  Harosh- 

ii i:in  ri<>i\  Symmachus  explains  the  king  of  Elam,  who  in- 
vaded Palestine,  to  be  the  king  of  the  Scythians.  The  his- 
torical fact  that  people  of  Scythian  manners  served  iu  the 
armies  of  the  Phoenicians,  may  serve  to  render  the  existence 
of  a  Scythian  colony  at  Beisan  more  probable  at  least,  than 
it  is  on  the  basis  of  the  traditions  communicated  by  Pliny 
and  others,  which  are  only  like  similar  stories  current  at 
Antioch  and  elsewhere. 


CHAPTER   IV.    12-24. 


8'< 


8th.  During  the  tumult  in  which  his  proud  army 
Is  shattered  by  the  heroic  deeds  of  Israel,  he  has 
succeeded  in  getting  well  on  towards  his  destina- 
tion, and  thinks  himself  to  have  found  a  safe  hid- 
ing-place with  a  friend.  The  language  is  de- 
signedly chosen  to  indicate  this  order  of  events  ' 
first,  ver.  15,  and  Siserafled;  then,  ver.  16,  Barak 
pursued;  finally,  ver.  17,  Sisera  had  (led.  —  Be- 
tween Hebe'-  the  Kenite  and  Jabin  there  was  peace  ; 
the  Kenite  therefore  had  not  shared  the  oppression 
under  which  Israel  suffered.  Consequently,  Sisera 
could  hope  to  find  in  his  tent  a  little  rest  from  the 
fatigue  of  his  long-continued1  exertions.  Securer 
still  was  the  shelter  of  the  woman's  tent.  In  that 
of  Heber,  he  might  have  feared  the  violence  of 
Barak :  the  tent  of  a  woman  no  one  enters  with 
hostile  purpose.  He  seems  first  to  have  made  in- 
quiries. She  meets  him  with  friendly  mien,  invites 
him  urgently,  and  quiets  his  apprehensions  :  "  fear 
not,"  she  says ;  she  prepares  him  a  couch  that  he 
may  rest  himself,  and  covers  him  carefully  with  a 

close  covering.  The  covering  is  called  n3>JpJP, 
a  word  which  occurs  only  here.  The  derivations 
given  in  Bochart  (Phaleg,  74$)  and  in  the  recent 
lexicons  (Gesenius,  Fiirst),  throw  no  light  on  it. 

rO"»tp  is  the  Syriac  and  Cbaldee  S3!Ca   hide, 

skin,  leather;  Arabic,  ~\tST2  (cf.  Freytag,  Lex. 
Arab.,  iv.,  sub  voce),  ciliciuiit,saccus.  This  is  finally 
indicated  by  those  Greek  versions  (followed  also 
by  Augustine ;  and  cf.  Rordarn,  p.  83)  which 
translate  it  Sfjifris ;  for  that  means  not  only  "  hide," 
but  also  "  leathern  covering,"  and  a  female  gar- 
ment, according  to  the  Etymol.  Magnum,  where  we 
read  of  a  yvvi}  peKaLvav  BtpJHv  7ju,<pteo7*eV7fl.  Thus 
also  the  direction  of  certain  Rabbins  that  this  word 

is  to  be  interpreted  as  Svp^ETQ  (stragula),  ex- 
plains itself.  The  Targuni  also  agrees  with  this ; 
for  it  has  SSM,  Kawaxij,  a  covering  rough  on 
one  side.  Nor  is  anything  else  meant  by  the  word 
S^C^b?  (in  Targum  of  Jon.,  Deut.  xxiv.  13). 
It  must  be  a  close  covering,  fitted  to  conceal  the 
soldier  who  lies  under  it. 

Sisera  is  not  incautious.  He  proceeds  to  ask 
for  drink,  pleading  thirst.  She  gives  him  of  her 
milk.  It  is  an  ancient,  oriental  practice,  common 
to  all  Bedouins,  Arabs,  and  the  inhabitants  of  des- 
erts in  general,  that  whoever  has  eaten  or  drunk 
anything  in  the  tent,  is  received  into  the  peace  of 
the  house.  The  Arab's  mortal  enemy  slumbers 
securely  in  the  tent  of  his  adversary,  if  he  have 
drunk  with  him.  Hence,  Saladin  refuses  to  give 
drink  to  the  bold  Frank  Knight,  Reinald  of 
Chatillon,  because  he  wishes  to  kill  him  (Marin, 
Hiit.  of  Saladin.  ii.  19).  Sisera  thinks  that  he 
may  now  safely  yield  to  sleep.  Only  he  feels  that 
he  ought  first  to  instruct  Jael  how  to  answer  any 
pursuers   that   may  come.     How   did  he   deceive 

1  [Staitlet  :  tf  It  must  have  been  three  days  after  the 
tattle  that  he  reached  a  spot,  which  seems  to  gather  into 
Itself,  as  in  the  last  scene  of  an  eventful  drama,  all  the 
characters  of  the  previous  acts."  —  Tr.] 

•2  [Dr.  Wordsworth,  treating  the  question,  u  What  is  the 
true  character  of  .Tael's  act  ?  "  argues  that  as  it  was  com- 
mended by  the  Song  of  Deborah,  and  as  that  Song  (f  is  re- 
cited by  the  Holy  Ghost  as  the  utterance  of  one  who  spake 
iy  his  own  inspiration/1  it  follows  that" Jael  must  have 
received  a  special  commission  from  God  to  attempt  and  per- 
form this  act.1'  Much  in  the  history,  he  says,  t(  confirms 
Jiis  conclusion."  What  he  adduces,  however,  is  not  forth 
repeating.     Dr.  Bachmann  enters  into  the  discussion  very 


himself!  Sisera  is  made  to  know  the  demoniikt 
violence  [damontsche  Gtwalt]  of  a  woman's  soul, 
which,  when  it  breaks  loose,  knows  no  bounds 
True,  Jabin  is  at  peace  with  Heber.  But  Jael's 
race  and  its  history  have  from  time  immemorial 
intergrown  with  those  of  Israel.  Israel's  freedom 
is  her  freedom  ;  Israel's  glory,  her  glory.  How 
many  women  have  been  dishonored  and  carried 
away  as  booty  by  Sisera  (eh.  v.  30)  !  Shall  she 
be  idle,  when  the  n  rant  gives  himself  up  into  her 
hands  ?  What,  if  she  saves  him  >  Will  it  not  be 
treason  on  her  part  against  the  ancient  covenant 
with  Israel?  Will  he  not,  by  virtue  of  his  vigor 
and  skill,  collect  fresh  troops,  and  threaten  Israel 
anew  i  Shall  it  be  said,  Jael  saved  the  enemy 
of  the  people  among  whom  she  lived  as  among 
brothers,  to  their  destruction  ?  The  conflict  in 
which  she  finds  herself  is  great ;  and  none  but 
a  great  and  powerful  soul  could  end  it  as  she 
does.  She  will  not  allow  him  to  escape  —  as  he 
will  do,  if  she  refuse  to  harbor  him  ;  and  yet,  she 
can  harbor  him  only  to  destroy,  —  and  that  not 
without  doing  violence  to  ancient  popular  custom. 
She  makes  her  decision.  She  scorns  the  reward 
which  Sisera's  safety  might  perhaps  have  brought 
her.  She  takes  the  nobler  object  into  considera- 
tion —  the  freedom  of  a  kindred  nation,  —  and  the 
older  right  preponderates.  A  ruthless  warrior 
stands  before  her,  the  violator  of  a  thousp.ud  laws 
of  right,  and  all  hesitation  vanishes.  She  has  no 
sword  with  which  to  hew  the  oppressor  down,  and 
seizes  the  terrible  weapon  of  womanly  cunning, 
before  which  no  law  can  stand.  Besides,  it  has 
been  noticed,  even  in  modern  times,  that  in  gen- 
eral the  women  of  those  regions  care  less  about 
the  rights  of  hospitality  than  the  men.  Burkhardt 
in  his  wanderings  had  personal  experience  of  this 
( Hitter,  xiv.  179). 

Jael,  through  her  terrible  deed,  far  surpasses 
similar  female  characters  of  other  times  and  na- 
tions. Concerning  the  Greek  Aretophila,  of  Cy- 
rene,  Plutarch  (On  the  Virtues  of  K  own,  n.  19) 
exclaims  :  "  Her  glorious  deed  raises  her  to  the 
rank  of  the  most  ancient  heroines !  "  What  was 
her  deed  ?  By  poison,  lies,  and  perjury,  she 
finally  succeeded  in  overthrowing  the  tyrant  who 
loved  her,  the  husband  who  trusted  her !  But  she 
would  never  have  risen  to  such  an  undertaking, 
had  he  not  slain  her  first  husband.  Still  more 
horrible  is  the  Chriemhild  of  the  German  Nibelun- 
gen.  She  invites  those  whom  she  wishes  to  mur- 
der, from  a  great  distance  ;  she  not  only  violates 
the  rights  of  hospitality,  but  her  victims  are  her 
own  relatives,  countrymen,  and  friends.  Jael  has 
no  by-ends,  no  personal  wrong  to  avenge;  the 
tyrant  is  a  stranger  to  her,  and  not  properly  her 
enemy.  But  he  is  the  oppressor  of  the  freedom  of 
the  people  of  God,  with  whose  life  her  own  and 
that  of  her  race  have  become  identified.  She  does 
a  demonlike  deed,  —  but  does  it  solely  and  purely 
in  the  service  of  general  ideas.9 

fully.  The  salient  points  of  his  essay  may,  however,  be 
stated  in  few  words.  He  thinks  it  unquestionable  that  the 
language  of  Deborah,  ch.  iv.  9,  "Jehovah  shall  sell  Sisera 
into  the  hand  of  a  woman,"  is  a  prediction  of  the  chieftain's 
destruction  by  Jael.  This  utterance  of  the  prophetess  can- 
not have  been  unknown  to  Jael.  Hence,  when  the  latter 
sees  Sisera  approach  her  tent  for  shelter,  she  at  once  obtains 
the  clear  and  certain  conviction  that  it  is  by  her  hands  that 
he  is  to  fall.  She  therefore  acts  under  a  divine  commission. 
Her  invitation  to  Sisera,  her  promise  of  proteclion,  and  her 
honorable  entertainment  of  him,  are  not  to  be  defended.  But 
f:  although  she  transcended  the  proper  limits  in  the  means 
she  employed,  it  is  not  to  be  denied  that  the  operation  of 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


It  had  not  been  necessary  for  her  to  kill  him. 
Scarcely  was  her  deed  accomplished,  before  Barak, 
swift  as  lightning  both  in  battle  and  in  pursuit, 
appeared.  But,  since  it  was  done,  it  served  to 
manifest  the  faitnfcilness  of  the  Kenite,  and  to  in- 
crease the  disgrace  of  Jabin.  Barak  had  gained 
nothing  by  personally  slaying  the  flying  foe;  only 
the  honor  of  the  hostile  chieftain  had  been  sub- 
served, if  he  had  fallen  by  the  sword  of  the  hero. 
Filled  with  astonishment,  Barak  enters  the  tent  of 
Jael  —  a  noble  subject  for  the  painter's  pencil ! '  — 
and  before  him  lies  the  mighty  Sisera,  a  dead  man, 
nailed  to  the  earth  by  a  woman  !  A  victory  thus 
begun,  could  not  but  end  magnificently.  Contin- 
ually more  telling  were  the  blows  that  fell  on 
Jabin's  head,  until  his  power  was  annihilated. 
No  other  Jabin  reigned  in  Hazor.  His  name  is 
thrice  repeated  in  verses  23  and  24,  in  order  to 
emphasize  its  importance. 

HOMILETICAL   AND    PRACTICAL. 

Deborah,  the  female  Judge,  full  of  fire,  and 
Barak  the  hero.  Israel's  sin  remains  ever  the 
same.  When  their  hero  dies,  when  the  elders  who 
have  seen  the  works  of  God  are  no  more,  the 
younger  generation  apostatizes.  So  perverse  and 
cowardly  is  the  human  heart ;  and  times  do  not 
change,  nor  experience  teach  it.  —  Staeke  :  Peace 
and  too  prosperous  days  are  not  long  good  for 
men. 

But  the  danger  of  the  judgment  becomes  ever 
greater,  the  tyranny  of  sin  ever  stronger  and  nearer. 
The  king  of  Aram,  whom  Othniel  smote,  was  dis- 
tant ;  the  king  of  Moab,  beyond  the  Jordan  ;  but 
the  king  of  Hazor  is  in  the  midst  of  the  land, 
possessed  of  unprecedented  power.  However,  the 
greater  the  power  of  the  enemy,  the  more  manifest 
become  the  wonders  of  God's  compassion.  The 
deliverer  raised  up  against  Moab,  though  left- 
handed,  is  a  man ;  but  against  the  master  of  nine 
hundred  iron  chariots,  the  battle  is  waged  through 
a  woman.  Thus,  1.  the  heathen  learn  that  victory 
comes  not  by  horses  or  horsemen,  but  by  the  word 
of  God ;  and,  2.  Israel  is  humbled,  not  only  by 
the  judgment,  but  also  by  the  mercy,  of  God. 

There  was  no  want  of  warlike  men  in  Israel ; 
but  lances  break  like  rushes,  when  the  heart  is  not 
courageous.  Israel,  with  all  its  strong  men,  is  im- 
ootent  so  long  as  it  lacks  faith  in  its  God.     Barak 

tile  Spirit  of  God  influenced  her  deed,  nor  that  she  acted 
from  the  impulse  of  the  obedience  of  faith.  It  is.  moreover, 
only  from  this  point  of  view  that  we  obtain  an  explanation 
of  the  fact  that  Deborah  in  her  judgment  (ch.  v.  24  ff. )  so 
Botiroly  overlooked  the  human  weakness  that  clung  to  Jael's 


is  a  valiant  hero,  but  a  womatv  must  call  him 
His  name  is  "Lightning,"  and  his  deeds  are 
mighty ;  but  the  lightning  is  kindled  by  the  fire- 
words  of  the  prophetess.  As  Moses  sings  after  the 
exodus,  "  The  Lord  is  a  man  of  war,  the  Lord  is 
his  name,"  so  Deborah's  word  and  song  testify 
that  God  alone  can  save.  To  make  this  truth 
seen  and  believed  by  all,  He  lends  his  victory  to  a 
woman.  Thus  the  vanity  of  men  reveals  itself,  who 
ascribe  to  themselves  that  which  belongs  to  God. 
Military  readiness  is  of  no  avail,  when  readiness 
of  spirit  is  not  cherished.  Not  legions,  but  proph- 
ets, guard  the  kingdom  of  God.  God  only  can 
conquer,  and  He  suffers  not  men  to  prescribe  the 
instruments  of  conquest. 

Barak  was  a  valiant  hero,  for  he  was  obedient. 
He  followed,  but  did  not  begin.  Hence,  also, 
though  he  gained  the  victory  in  the  field,  he  never- 
theless did  not  complete  it.  He  took  his  impulse 
from  a  woman,  —  with  Deborah,  but  not  without 
her,  he  was  willing  to  go  where  he  went ;  a  wo- 
man likewise  finished  the  victory,  when  Jael  slew 
the  leader  of  the  enemy.  He  waited  for  the  spirit 
which  Deborah  breathed  into  him ;  not  so  did 
Jael  wait  for  his  sword  to  lay  Sisera  low.  Hence, 
a  woman's  name  became  connected  both  with  the 
beginning  and  the  end  of  the  great  achievement. 
Thus  God  grants  results  according  to  the  measure 
of  courage.  As  we  believe,  so  we  have.  If  Barak 
had  believed  like  Deborah,  he  would  have  been  as 
near  to  God  as  she  was.  But  the  Spirit  of  God 
\  needs  no  soldiers  to  conquer.  He  glorifies,  through 
his  word,  the  despised  things  of  the  world.  Jesus 
selected  as  disciples,  not  athletes,  hut  children  of 
God  who  sought  their  Father.  Put  up  thy  sword, 
He  said  to  Peter.  When  risen  from  the '  dead,  it 
was  to  a  woman  that  He  first  appeared. 

Starke  :  Holy  men  love  holy  company,  for 
therein  they  find  a  great  blessing.  —  The  same  : 
We  with  our  distrust  often  close  God's  hands,  so 
that  but  for  our  own  actions,  He  would  give  us  far 
more  than  He  does ;  for  God  is  more  inclined  to 
give,  than  we  to  receive.  —  The  same  :  So  are 
men's  hearts  in  the  hands  of  God,  that  out  of  the 
timid  He  can  make  heroes,  and  out  of  heroes,  cow- 
ards. —  Gehlach  :  The  holy  faith  that  animates 
the  deed  of  Jael,  is  of  divine  origin ;  the  ways  and 
methods,  however,  of  rude  and  savage  times  con- 
tinue in  part  until  the  time  when  all  the  promises 
of  God  in  Christ  shall  be  fulfilled. 

deed."  Compare  the  remarks  of  Dean  Stanley,  Hist,  of  'Ju 
Jewish  Church,  i.  365-370.  —  Tb.] 

1  It  is  powerfully  treated  in  the  Bibtl  in  Bildem,  p«V 
lished  by  Schnorr. 


CHAPTER  V.   1-31. 


Deborah's   Song   of  Triumph. 
Chapter  V.     1-31. 


THE    SUPERSCRIPTION. 

Verse  1. 


1      Then  sang  Deborah  and  Barak  the  son  of  Abinoam  on  that  day,  saying, 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

The  special  sign  of  the  prophetic  spirit,  is  the  use 
of  lyrical  expression.  The  praise  of  God,  and  the 
proclamation  of  his  mighty  deeds,  burst  from  the 

firophets  in  the  rapture  of  poetic  visions.  Their 
anguage  is  glowing  and  powerful,  like  a  torch  in 
the  night.  This  lofty  view  of  the  nature  of  poetry 
shows  itself  everywhere.  Poets,  says  Socrates, 
speak  like  men  divinely  inspired,  like  those  who 
deliver  oracles.  Among  the  Romans,  legendary- 
tradition  (Liv.  i.  7)  told  of  an  ancient  prophetic 
nymph,  Carmenta  (from  Carmen).  Of  no  Judge 
is  it  expressly  said  that  he  was  a  prophet :  this  is 
affirmed  of  Deborah  alone  ;  and  she  alone  among 
them  sang,  —  and  that,  not  merely  as  Miriam,  who 
with  her  women  formed  the  responsive  choir  to 
Moses'  song,  but  as  Moses,  the  victor,  himself. 

She  sang,  "'tT'ril.  She  was  the  creator  of  the 
eong.  Quite  parallel  is  the  expression,  Ex.  xv.  1 : 
"  then  sang  Moses  and  the  sons  of  Israel "  (^Ity), 
not  "  they  sang."  Moses,  divinely  inspired,  com- 
posed the  song,  and  the  people  sang  it.  The  case 
was  similar  with  Deborah.     The  feminine  of  the 

verb,  with  the  following  connective,  "1,  expresses 
the  independent  creation  and  the  joint-execution 
of  the  Song;  for  already  in  the  fourth  chapter, 
Barak  stands  for  the  most  part  for  the  people  them- 
selves. Thus,  Barak  has  gone  up  to  Mount  Tabor 
ch.  iv.  12  ;  Sisera's  army  is  thrown  into  confusion 
before  Barak,  ver.  15  ;  Barak  pursues,  ver.  16  ;  etc. 
Here  also,  therefore,  Barak  takes  the  place  which 
in  the  Song  of  Moses  the  "  children  of  Israel  "  oc- 
cupy. He  and  his  men  raise  Deborah's  hymn  as 
their  song  of  triumph  ;  and  thus  it  becomes  a  na- 
tional hymn.  Song  is  the  noblest  ornament  which 
the  nations  of  antiquity  can  devise  for  victory. 
They  preserve  its  utterances  tenaciously,  both  as 
evidences  of  their  prowess,  and  as  incentives  to 
action  in  times  of  dishonor.  In  the  days  of  Pau- 
sanias  (in  the  second  century  after  Christ),  and 
therefore  about  800  years  after  the  event,  the 
Messenians  still  sang  a  triumphal  song  of  the  time 
of  Aristomenes  (Pans.  iv.  16).  Perhaps  the  most 
interesting  remnant  of  German  recollections  of 
Arminius,  is  the  Westphalian  popular  song,  still 
sung  in  the  region  of  what  was  once  the  field  of 

1  [The  author's  version  of  the  Song  forms  an  essential 
part  of  his  exposition,  and  we  therefore  substitute  a  transla- 
tion of  it,  aduaring  as  closely  as  practicable  to  his  German, 
for  the  ordinary  English  text.     For  Dr.  Cassel's  rendering  of 

H^n^,  cf.  "Textual  and  Grammatical,''  note  1,  p.  23.  In 
general,  it  will  be  seen  that  he  does  not  anxiously  aim  at 
literalness.  The  black-faced  letters  are  designed  to  imitate, 
rather  than  reproduce,  the  alliteration  which  in  our  author's 
riew  forms  a  marked  feature  of  the  poem  (see  above).     It 


victory  (cf.  Horkel,  in  Der  Gesck.  der  Deutschen  Vor- 
zeit,  i.  257).  In  the  case  of  Israel,  whose  victories 
are  the  steps  in  its  national  work,  and  the  evi- 
dences of  its  religious  truth,  the  interest  of  such  a 
song  is  the  greater,  because  there  tradition  moulded 
the  conscience  of  the  generations,  and  fidelity  to 
its  earliest  history  formed  the  conditions  of  the 
national  calling,  greatness,  and  glory. 

The  form  of  the  Song,  as  of  the  old  Hebrew 
poetry  generally,  is  that  of  free  rhythm.  The  Song 
is  a  poetical  stream  :  everywhere  poetical,  and  yet 
untrammeled  by  any  artistic  division  into  strophes. 
Such  a  division,  it  is  true,  is  not  altogether  want- 
ing ;  but  it  is  never  made  a  rule.  Consequently, 
efforts  to  force  it  systematically  on  the  poem,  while 
only  traces  of  it  show  themselves,  are  all  in  vain. 
There  is  no  want  of  finish ;  introduction  and  con- 
clusion are  well  defined ;  but  the  pauses  subordi- 
nate themselves  to  the  thoughts,  and  these  unfold 
themselves  free  as  the  waves.  The  peculiar  char- 
acter of  the  Song  consists  in  the  boldness  of  its 
imagery  and  the  force  of  its  unusual  language.  It 
appropriates,  in  a  natural  manner,  all  those  forms 
which  genuine  poetry  does  not  seek  but  produce ; 
but  it  appropriates  them  all  with  a  freedom  which 
endures  none  as  a  rule,  yet  without,  like  the  nat- 
ural stream,  violating  harmony.  The  Song,  then, 
has  strophes,  but  they  are  not  of  equal  measure ; 
it  moves  along  in  parallelisms,  but  with  variations 
corresponding  to  the  movement  of  the  thought. 
The  most  interesting  feature  to  be  noticed,  is  the 
alliteration,  which  appears  in  the  highest  develop- 
ment and  delicacy,  as  elsewhere  only  in  the  old 
Norse  poems,  but  also  with  considerable  freedom 
from  restraint.  It  is  important  to  notice  this, 
because  it  testifies,  more  than  any  division  into 
strophes  that  may  exist,  to  the  nature  of  the  popu- 
lar song  and  its  lyrical  use.  The  divisions  which 
the  poem  certainly  shows,  are  determined  only  by 
its  own  course  of  thought.*  They  are  :  the  praise 
of  God,  as  introduction  (vers.  2-5) ;  the  delinea- 
tion of  the  emergency  (vers.  6-8);  the  call  tc 
praise  that  the  evil  no  longer  exists  (vers.  9-11)  ; 
delineation  of  the  victory  and  the  victors  (vers.  12- 
23);  the  fate  of  the  enemy  (vers.  24-31).  The 
renderings  which  distinguish  the  following  trans- 
lation from  the  older  versions  extant,  will  be  jus- 
tified under  the  several  verses  in  which  they 
occur.1 

may  be  useful  to  some  readers  to  be  referred  to  the  follow 
ing  readily  accessible  English  versions  of  the  Song  :  Robin- 
son's, with  an  extended  commentary,  in  Bibl.  Repository, 
1831,  p.  568  ;  "  Review  of  Hollmann  on  the  Song  of  Deborah," 
Chris.  Spectator  (New  Haven),  ii.  307  ;  Robbins,  "  The  Song 
of  Deborah."  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  1855,  p-  597  ;  Milman's 
version,  in  Hist,  of  the  Jews,  i.  292  ;  Stanley's,  in  Jewish 
Church,  i.  370.  The  whole  special  literature  of  the  subject 
is  given  Ity  Bachmann,  i.  298  ff.  —  Tr.} 


90 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


IXTKODVCTIOir. 

Vers.  2-5. 

2  That  in  Israel  wildly  waved  the  hair 

In  the  people's  self-devotion,  —  Praise  God ! 

3  Hear,  O  ye  kings,  give  ear,  O  ye  princes  : 
I  for  God,1  unto  Him  will  I  sing, 

I  will  strike  the  strings  unto  God,  the  Lord  of  Israel  I 

4  O  God,  at  thy  march  from  Seir, 

At  thy  going  forth  from  Edom's  fields, 

The  earth  trembled,  and  the  heavens  dropped, 

Tea,  the  clouds  dropped  down  water. 

5  The  mountains  were  dismayed  before  God, 
Even  this  2  Sinai,  before  God,  the  Lord  of  Israel. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  8.  —  Dr.  Cassel :  Ieh  fiir  Gott ;  but  the  accents  separate  S3DN  from  rTirPv,  and  there    ippeare  no  good 

reason  for  disregarding  them.  The  position  and  repetition  of  the  subject  ^wDS  serve  to  bring  the  person  of  the  Singet 
prominently  into  view,  and  that  not  in  her  character  as  woman,  but  as  prophetess,  filled  with  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  there- 
fore entitled  to  challenge  the  attention  of  kings  and  princes.     So  Bachmann.  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  5.  —  ^D     nT  :     literally,  « this  Sinai.''      "  Sinai  is  present  to  the  poetic  eye  of  Deborah  "  (Wordsworth). 
Dr.  Cassel  translates  by  the  definite  article,  der  Sinai.  —  TR.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  2.  The  above  translation  of  ver.  2 1  differs 
from  all  earlier  renderings,  which  however  also 
differ  more  or  less  from  each  other.  The  most  in- 
teresting among  them  is  that  of  those  Greek  ver- 
sions which  render  "  eV  t<£  £p|acr8ai  upxwytvs."  It 
has  been  followed  by  a  multitude  of  esteemed  ex- 
positors (Schnurrer,  Rosenmiiller,  Ewald,  Ber- 
theau,  Bottger,  Kemink) ;  and  yet  it  betrays  its 

Egyptian  origin,  since  in  connection  with  ?T23 

niyTS  it  thought  only  of  the  Egyptian  Pha- 
raoh or  king,  and  expounded  accordingly.  A  simi- 
lar, more  homiletical  interpretation  proceeds  from 
the  Targum.  This  was  more  naturally  reminded  of 
fT0y"W2,  ukio,  vindicta ;  the  Midrash,  by  speak- 
ing of  the- cessation  of  the  sufferings,  whose  pre- 
vious existence  is  implied  in  the  necessity  for  ven- 
geance, shows  that  it  adopts  the  same  interpreta- 
tion. Teller  also,  perhaps  unconsciously,  arrived 
at  the  same  explanation.     The  interpretation  of 

Raschi,  who  takes  3?"7B  as  equivalent  to  Y~)!?.i  and 

of  those  who  suppose  it  equivalent  to  CO  7?,  may, 
like  various  others,  be  passed  over  in  silence.  The 
natural  exposition,  which  is  always  at  the  same 
time  the  poetical,  has  on  all  sides  been  overlooked. 

V"!"  is  undoubtedly  (as  in  Arabic)  the  hair  of 
.he  head,  and  more  particularly  the  long,  waving 
nair,  the  coma,'-  as  appears   from  Ezek.  xliv.  20. 

my^S?  is  its  plural  form,  and  is  used  in  Deut. 

i  bfcnapg  rra-js  visa 
:rnrr  0-13  cv  STanrra 

t     •  :it        at        •--  :    •    : 

2  That  we  must  go  back  to  the  sense  of  this  word,  is  also 
tdmitted  by  Keil ;  but  he  attaches  a  meaning  to  it  which 

t  never   has.     [Kkil  :        /"ll-1"^   here  means   properly 


xxxii.  42,  where  blood  is  spoken  of  as  flowing 

down  from  the  hairy  head  &iM  niS~jB  BftHfl). 

Hence  the  verb  3?"]2,  (cf.  ko^v,  to  cultivate  the 
hair),  signifies  "to  make  loose,"  to  allow  to  "be- 
come wild,"  as  when  the  hair  flies  wild  aud  loose 
about  the  neck;  wherefore  it  is  said  of  Aaron 
(Ex.  xxxii.  25)  that   he   had  caused   the   people 

n3?^3,   "  to  grow  wild,"  and  of  the  people  that 

they  "  had  grown  wild "  (571?)-  The  circum- 
stances under  which  the  hair  was  allowed  to  grow, 
are  well  known.  The  person  who  makes  a  vow, 
who  would  be  holy  unto  God,  is  directed  (Num. 

vi.  5)  to  let  his  hair  grow  (2"7?  O?).  The  in- 
stance of  Samson,  to  which  we  shall  come  here- 
after, is  familiar.     The  present  occasion  for  this 

observance  arose  037  313  .T^H?,  *  when  the  peo- 
ple consecrated  themselves,  devoted  themselves 
(se  devovit),  to  God,  —  the  people,  namely,  who  gave 
heed  to  the  voice  of  Deborah,  and  placed  themselves 
in  the  position  of  one  who  called  himself  holy  unto 
God.  Israel,  through  disobedience,  had  fallen  into 
servitude.  Those  who  followed  Barak,  had  faith 
in  God  ;  upon  the  strength  of  this  faith  they  haz- 
arded their  lives.  They  devoted  themselves  wholly 
as  a  sacrifice  to  God.  The  verse  therefore  exhibits 
a  profound  apprehension  of  the  essential  nature  of 
the  national  life.  It  sets  forth  the  ground  of  the 
very  possibility  of  the  Song,  and  therefore  stands 
at  its  head.  Israel  could  be  victorious  only  by 
repentance  and  return  to  obedience.4  The  proph- 
etess delineates,  poetically  and  with  forcible  beauty. 

comati,  hairy  persons,  I.  e.  those  who  are  endowed  with 
strength.  The  champions  in  battle  are  meant,  who  by 
their  prowess  and  valor  preceded  the  people."  —  Tr] 

8  The  verb  213  occurs  only  in  Exodus,  Ezra,  Chron- 
icles, and  here. 

4  The  Targum,  though  merely  paraphrastic,  in  Its  spirl 
agrees  entirely  with  this  interpretation. 


CHAPTER    V.    2-5. 


91 


the  people's  great  act  of  self-devotion,  when  whole 
tribes  give  themselves  to  God,  —  their  hair  stream- 
ing, their  hearts  rejoicing,  —  and  place  their 
strength  and  trust  in  Him.  They  were  the  /capri- 
Koiiioivrts '  of  a  divine  freedom.  This  interpreta- 
tion also  brings  the  parallelism  out  clearly  :  3?^?? 
stands  in  both  causal  and  appositional  correlation 

with  2 ^T2P'73.  The  preposition  ?  points  out 
the  condition  of  the  people  in  which  they  conquered 
and  sang.  The  Song  is  the  people's  consecration 
hymn,  and  praises  God  for  the  prosperous  and  suc- 
cessful issue  with  which  He  has  crowned  their 
vows.  "  Praise  ye  God,"  it  exclaims,  "  for  the 
long  locks,"  —  i.  e.  for  and  in  the  people's  conse- 
cration. The  result  of  every  such  consecration  as 
God  blesses,  is  his  praise.  And  now,  the  nations 
must  hear  it !  The  object  of  Israel's  national 
pride,  is  its  God.  Hence,  Israel's  song  of  triumph 
is  a  call  upon  surrounding  kings  to  hear  what  God 
did  for  his  people  when  they  gave  themselves  up  to 
Him.2 

Ver.  3.  Hear,  O  ye  kings  and  princes.  Both 
are  expressions  for  the  "  mighty  ones  "  among  the 

nations,  cf.  Ps.  ii.  2.  D^TT  are  the  great,  the 
strong.  Rosen  manifestly  answers  to  the  Sanskrit 
vrisna  (Benfey,  i.  332),  Old  High  German  riso, 
giant.  —  Deborah  proposes  not  merely  to  sing,  but 

adds,  I  will  play  C'SW).  As  in  the  Psalms,  sing- 
ing and  playing  are  joined  together,  one  repre- 
senting thought,  the  other  sound.  The  action  ex- 
pressed by  "'ST,  is  performed  on  various  instru- 
ments (cf.  Ps.  cxliv.  9,  "  ten-stringed  lute  "),  chiefly 
on  the  cithern,  a  species  of  harp  or  lyre  (Ps.  xcviii. 
5,  etc.),  but  also  with  timbrels  ami  citherns  (Ps. 
cxlix.  3,  cf.  Ps.  lxxxi.  3).  Miriam  also  accom- 
panied her  antiphonal  song  with  timbrels  (tympanis, 
Ex.  xv.  20),  Jephthah's  daughter  used  them  as  she 
came  to  meet  her  father  (Jndg.  xi.  34).  Nor  can 
they  have  failed  as  an  accompaniment  to  the  Song 
of  our  prophetess.  Tympana  (toph,  timbrels)  ap- 
pear in  antiquity  as  the  special  instrument  of  im- 
passioned   women    (Creuzer,    Symbolik,    iii.    489). 

The  derivation  of  the  word  ""?J  is  not  clear.  De- 
litzschis  doubtless  right  in  deciding  (Psalter,  i.  19) 
that  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  samar  which 
signifies  to  "prune  the  vine."  That  samar  re- 
minds one  of  the  Greek  0711X71,  a  clasp  and  carving- 
knife.  Simmer,  to  play  (scil.  mismor,  \fitAfi6s),  dis- 
tinguishes itself  as  an  onomatopoetic  word.  The 
primitive  Greek  singer,  whose  contest  with  the 
muses  in  cithern-playing  Homer  already  relates, 
was  named   Thamyris  (II.  ii.  594). 

Vers  4,  5.  O  God  at  thy  inarch  from  Seir. 
An   Israelitish  song  can  praise  God  only  by  re- 

1  ["  Long-haired,"  cf.  thfi  Homeric  KapTiKopovvras  Axat- 
ov?,  "  long-haired  Greeks,"  11.  ii.  11,  etc.  Among  the  later 
Greeks,  long  hair  was  the  badge  of  freedom,  and  hence  was 
oot  allowed  to  slaves.  See  Smith's  Diet.  Antiquities,  s.  v. 
"Coma."— Tr.] 

2  [Dr.  Bachmann  adopts  the  view  of  ver.  2  given  by  the 
LXX.  according  to  the  Alexandrine  Codex :  ee  t(3  ap£air9ai 
ip^jyou?  kv  *Ierpa>j\,  and  translates,  »  that  the  leaders  led," 
9tc.     Tho  idea  of  tr  leading  "  or  t(  going  before,"  he  says, 

pay  be  readily  derived  from  the  radical  meaning  of  3?^2, 

to  break  forth,  "  sc.  into  prominence  (hen-orbrechen).    His 

sriticism  on  our  author's  translation  is  as  follows  :  c:  To  say 

nothing  of  the  fact  that  the  partitive  (?)  7S~>t£T3  excites 
nrprise,  standing  as  it  does  in  parallelism  with  C3?,  it  may 


hearsing  the  history  of  Israel.  For  the  fact  that 
God  is  in  its  history  constitutes  the  sole  founda 
tion  of  Israel's  national  existence  and  rights  ovef 
against  other  nations.  But  this  immanence  of 
God  in  the  history  of  the  people,  manifests  itself 
most  wonderfully" in  those  events  through  which, 
as  by  steps,  Israel  became  a  nation.  For  not_  in 
Egypt,  where  Israel  was  a  servant,  was  the  nation 
born,  nor  through  the  exodus  alone  ;  the  nation- 
alitv  of  Israel  is  the  child  of  the  desert.  There, 
through  the  self-revelation  of  God,  Israel  became 
a  free  people.  The  journey  through  the  desert  — 
of  which  Sinai  was  the  central  point,  —  by  the 
giving  of  the  law  and  the  impartation  of  doctrine, 
by  the  wonderful  provision  of  food  and  the  gift  of 
victory,  and  by  the  infliction  of  awful  judgments, 
became  one  continuous  act  of  divine  revelation. 
Thus,  Israel  came  forth  from  the  desert  a  perfected 
nation.  The  prophetic  insight  of  the  Hebrew 
poets,  at  one  clear  glance,  traces  the  desert-birth 
of  the  nation  back  to  the  manifest  nearness  of  God 
as  its  cause  All  that  happened  to  the  people 
came  from  God.  "  The  Lord  came  from  Sinai," 
says  the  Song  of  Moses  (Dent,  xxxiii.  2),  "and 
rose  up  from  Seir ;  He  shined  forth  from  Mount 
Paran."  The  114th  psalm  (ver.  2)  represents  the 
exodus  from  Egypt  as  the  beginning  of  Israel's 
nationality  :  "  Then  Judah  became  his  sanctuary." 
Deborah  takes  Seir  and  Edom,  whence  Israel  en 
tered  history  as  a  nation,  as  representatives  of  the 
whole  desert ;  which  from  her  position  was,  even 
geographically,  quite  natural.  The  68th  Psalm, 
borrowing  from  this  passage,  at  the  same  time  ex- 
plains it  by  substituting  more  general  terms  for 
Seir  and  Edom  :  3  "  When  thou  wentest  forth  be- 
fore thy  people,  when  thou  didst  march  through 
the  wilderness."  The  wilderness  was  the  theatre 
of  the  revelation  of  God.  There  He  appeared  to 
his  people.  Where  is  there  another  nation  to 
whom  this  occurred  ?  "  Hear,  ye  kings,"  cries  the 
prophetess,  what  nation  was  ever  raised  up,  in- 
structed, and  led,  bv  the  manifest  presence  of  such 
a  God? 

The  earth  trembled.  The  superior  grandeur 
of  Scriptural  over  the  noblest  Hellenic  conceptions, 
is  scarcely  anywhere  more  clearly  apparent.  The 
earthquake,  with  Hesiod  and  others,  is  symbolic  of 
conflict  between  the  powers  above  and  those  below, 
between  Zeus  and  Typhon  :  — 

ft  Great  Olympus  trembled  beneath  the  immortal  feet 
Of  the  Ruler  rising  up.  and  hollow  groaned  the  earth. 

The  earth  resounded,  and  the  heavens  around,  and  ttw 
floods  of  ocean."  4 

To  the  prophetic  spirit  of  Deborah,  also,  and  of 
the  Psalms,  the  earthquake  becomes  a  powerful 
symbol ;  but  it   is  the   symbol   of  the   creature's 

well  be  doubted  whether  the  expression  taken  in  this  sense 
would  ever  have  been  intelligible,  notwithstanding  the  al- 
leged explanatory  apposition  of  the  second  member  of  the 

verse  ;  at  all  events,  in  the  language  of  the  law  27^Q 
denotes,  not  an  act,  but  a  condition  (the  consequence  of  the 
*12V^~S^  *13?I*1,  Num.  vi.  5),  such  as  at  the  beginning 
of  the  fulfillment  of  a  vow  of  consecration  —  and  to  a  begin- 
ning the  reference  would  have  to  be  here,  —  could  have  no 
existence."  —  Tr.] 
s  For     -pri&p     TJiTIS^S,    Ps-    lxviii.  substitute 

Tyar  \DQb,  and  for  rSis  rn'trp  t^V^ 
u  has  lia'tr^   ^vvs. 

4  Hesiod,  Theogon.,  v."  840,  etc- 


92 


THE   BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


humility  and  awe  on  account  of  the  sacred  near- 
ness of  God.  For  Israel's  sake,  God  descended 
from  on  high  ;  the  creature  knows  its  Lord,  and 
trembles.  The  earth  trembles,1  and  "  the  heavens 
pour."  (In  the  desert  peninsula  of  Sinai  the  lat- 
ter is  a  wonder.  Even  at  this  day,  the  Bedouins 
cherish  the  superstition  that  Moses  had  in  his 
possession  the  book  which  determines  the  fall  of 
rain.)  The  heavens  lose  their  brazen  aridity; 
whatever  is  hard  and  unyielding,  firm  as  rock 
and  stone,  becomes  soft  and  liquid :  '2  the  moun- 
tains   stagger,   the   rocks   flow   down   like   water 

G1TI3).  The  earthquake-belt  that  girdles  the 
Mediterranean  afforded  numerous  instances  of  such 
phenomena.  Tremendous  masses  of  rock  have 
been  shaken  down  from  Mount  Sinai  by  earth- 
quakes (Kitter  xiv.  601,  etc.).  Even  this  Sinai. 
That  is,  Sinai  especially,  Sinai  before  all  others  is 
the  mountain  that  shook  when  God  descended, 
according  to  the  statement,  Ex.  xix.  18;  "and 
the  whole  mount  quaked  greatly."  Thunders 
rolled  and  heavy  clouds  hung  upon  its  summit 
(Ex.  xix.  16).  "The  mountains  saw  thee,"  says 
Habakkuk  (ch.  iii.  10),  "and  they  trembled ;  the 
overflowing  of  the  waters  passed  by."  "  What 
ailed  you,  ye   mountains,  that   ye  trembled   like 

1  Cf.  Jer.  x.  10;  Joel  iv.  (iii.)  16,  etc. 


lambs  ?  "  asks  the  Psalmist,  Ps.  cxiv.  6  :  "  Before 
the  Lord  the  earth  trembled,  before  the  God  oi 
Jacob." 

These  introductory  ascriptions  of  praise  to  God, 
have  no  reference  to  the  battle  at  the  Kishon. 
They  magnify  the  power  and  majesty  of  Israel's 
God,  as  manifested  in  the  nation's  earlier  history 
Such  is  the  God  of  Israel,  the  nations  are  told. 
Such  is  He  who  has  chosen  Israel  for  his  people. 
It  was  there  in  the  desert  that  they  became  his  ; 
and  for  that  reason  the  poet  selects  the  scenes  of 
the  desert  as  the  material  of  her  praise.  She 
speaks  with  great  brevity  :  the  68th  Psalm  ampli- 
fies her  conceptions.  Very  unfortunate  is  the 
conjecture  (Biittger)  that  by  Sinai  Tabor  is  meant. 
It  is  altogether  at  variance  with  the  spirit  of  the 
old  covenant,  which  could  never  consent  to  make 
Sinai  the  representative  of  any  less  sacred  moun- 
tain. Moreover,  the  battle  was  not  on  Tabor,  but 
in  the  plain,  near  the  Kishon.  With  ver.  5  closes 
that  part  of  the  Song  by  which  the  "  kings  and 
princes "  are  informed  that  the  God  whom  the 
elements  fear,  has  become  the  Lord  of  Israel. 
With  ver.  6  the  poetess  first  enters  on  the  history 
of  the  state  of  aflairs  which  existed  in  Israel  pre- 
vious to  her  great  deed. 

2  «  The  mountains  melt  like  was,"  cf.  Pa.  xcril.  6. 


THE   PREVIOUS    DISTRESS. 


Vers.    6-8. 

After l  the  days  of  Shamgar,  son  of  Anath, 

After  the  Helper's  (Jael's)  days, 

The  highways  were  deserted, 

The  traveller  went  in  winding  ways. 

Deserted  were  Israel's  hamlets,2  deserted, 

Till  I  Deborah  rose  up  —  rose  up  a  mother  in  Israel. 

New  gods  had  they  got  them 3  —  therefore   the   press  of  war  approached  their 

gates  ;  4 
Among  forty  thousand  in  Israel  was  there  found  6  or  shield  or  spear  ? 

TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 


[1  Ver.  6 — On  thia  translation  of  21,  compare  the  author's  remarks  below.  The  justification  they  attempt,  is,  however 
too  forced  and  artificial  to  be  satisfactory.  The  passages  cited  in  its  support,  are  rather  against  it.  For  in  Num.  xiv.  11, 
It  is  the  very  fact  that  Israel's  unbelief  exists  contemporaneously,  in  the  presence,  as  it  were,  of  mighty  wonders,  that 
makes  it  ao  culpable.  And  so  in  the  passages  cited  from  Isaiah  (ch.  v.  25  ;  ix.  11  (12)  ;  x.  4),  it  is  the  continuance  of  Je- 
hovah's auger  while  surrounded,  so  to  speak,  by  the   terrible  evidences  of  previous  punitive  inflictions,  that  gives  it  itf 

full  dreadfulness.  It  seems  necessary,  therefore,  to  take  2  here  in  the  sense  of  "  in,"  tf  during."  It  is  necessary,  further, 
to  place  Shamgar  not  in,  but  after,  the  eighty  years'  rest  procured  by  Ehud,  cf.  on  ch.  iii.  31 ;  for  while  the  tf  land  rested," 
such  a  state  of  affairs  as  Deborah  here  describes  cannot  have  existed.  He  belongs  to  the  period  of  the  Canaanite  oppres- 
sion in  the  north,  and  fougiit  against  the  Philistiues  who  rose  up  in  the  south  (so  Bachmann  and  others).  A  single  ex- 
ploit is  told  of  him  ;  and  the  comparatively  inferior  position  a-ssigned  him  in  the  Book  of  Judges,  seems  to  warrant  the 
conclusion  that  it  was  the  only  remarkable  deed  he  did.  That  deed,  however,  was  one  which  would  make  him  universally 
known  and  held  up  as  a  great  hero.  Deborah  seizes  on  this  popular  estimate  of  Shamgar,  in  order  by  contrast  to  heighten 
the  glory  of  the  divine  deliverance  just  achieved.     Such  was  your  condition  when  your  great  hero  lived,  she  says  :  but 

now,  behold,  what  hath  God  wrought !  —  The  words  ^V^  ^"^B,  "  in  the  days  of  Jael,"  contain  another  difficulty.  It 
must  strike  every  one  as  inappropriate  that  one  who,  so  tar  as  we  know,  had  only  now  become  famous,  and  that  by  a 
deed  of  deliverance,  namely,  Jael,  the  slayer  of  Sisera,  should  be  connected  with  the  past  misery.  Dr.  Cassel's  sugges- 
tion that  ,  3?^  is  to  be  taken  as  a  surname  or  popular  designation  of  some  hero  (see  below),  becomes  therefore  exceed- 
ingly attractive.  But  according  to  our  view  of  2,  the  hero  thus  designated  cannot  be  Ehud,  but  must  be  Shamgar 
-Ta. 

[a  Ver.  7  —  }1THS.     Gesenius  and  Fiirst  define  this  word  aa  properly  meaning,  K  rule,  dominion  ;  "  here,  conewfte  lot 


CHAPTER   V.   5-8. 


■'  rulers,  leaders."  So  also  Bertheau,  De  Wette,  Buusen,  and  similarly  many  previous  expositors  an  i  versions  :  LXX  ,  Cod 
Vat.  Svparoi,  al.  codd.  01  KpaTovvres  (Cod.  Al.  simply  transfers  the  word,  and  writes  Qpdgutv) ;    It.  Veri  potentes,  Yulg./ortei. 

This  undoubtedly  yields  a  good  sense  ;  but,  as  Bachmann  points  out,  it  rests  on  a  meaning  of  th*  root  T~l2.  which  al 
though  belonging  to  it  in  Arabic,  it  does  not  practically  have  in  Hebrew.  Moreover,  it  appears  to  be  a  hazardous  pro 
ceeding  to  separate  ]iT~12  from   TIT^S   in  signification,  if  not  (as   Furst  does)  in   root-relations.     Accordingly,   Bach 

mann  and  Keil,  like  our  author  and  others,  explain  T'lTHS  DT  i""TT^2,  and  make  it  mean  the  "  open  country,''  or  t(  th« 
unwalled  cities  or  villages  of  the  open  country."  In  this  they  only  follow  the  Targum,  Peshito,  most  of  the  Rabbins, 
and  many  earlier  and  later  expositors.  The  form  of  the  word  shows  that  it  is  properly  an  abstract,  cf.  Ges.  Gr,  83,  2 ; 
84,  15 ;  Ewald,  163,  b,  d.  Keil  and  Cassel  make  it  apply  in  the  concrete  to  the  cities,  villages,  or  hamlets,  Bachmann  to 
the  population,  of  the  open  country  (Lnndvolk).  The  connection  of  the  passage,  he  thinks,  requires  a  personal,  not  local, 
Signification  ;  for  as   ver.  8   a  corresponds  to  (or  rather  gives  the  ground  of)  ver.  6  c  d,  bo  ver.  7  a  (the  cessation  of 

]1T~12)    must  correspond  to  ver.  8  b  (the  absence  of  shield  and  spear).     He   further  argues  that  as   in  ver.  2,  7  b,  and 

8  6,  7SHtt?^21  refers  to  the  people  of  Israel,  it  must  also  refer  to  them  in  ver.  7  a  ;  and,  finally,  that  the  signification 
11  rural  population,*'  is  more  suitable  in  ver.  11.  The  ultimate  result  is  the  same  whether  one  or  the  other  interpretation 
be  adopted  ;  yet,  as  Bachmann's  arguments  do  not  appear  to  have  much  force,  and  as  the  immediately  preceding  men- 
tion of  highways  leads  the  mind  to  think  of  local  centres  of  population  rather  than  of  the  population  itself,  we  prefer  to 
Interpret  villages  or  hamlets.  —  Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  8-  —  Br.  Cassel's  translation  conforms  more  closely  to  the  original:  Gewdhlt  hatten  sit  neve  Gbtter,—.  "  they 
had  chosen  new  gods."  The  above  English  rendering  was  adopted  in  order  to  reproduce  the  alliteration  of  the  German. 
-Tr.] 

(4  Ver.  8.—  Z"Hl?tI7  Cnb  7S  :  literally,  "then  war  (was  at  the)  gates."  Cnb  is  best  explained  as  a  verbal 
noun  from  piel,  the  vowel  of  the  final  syllable  of  the  absolute  CH/  being  shortened  because  of  the  close  connection 
with  the  following  word,  and  the  retraction  of  the  tone  being  omitted  on  account  of  the  toneless  initial  syllable  of 
D^Vtt?  (Bertheau,  Keil,  Bachmann).  C^Vtt?  may  be  genitive  (in  which  case  Cn7  must  be  in  the  construe! 
state)  or  accusative  of  place,  which  is  more  simple.  —  Te.] 

[5  Ver.  S.  —  HS"1^- DS.  According  to  Keil  and  others  CS  introduces  a  negative  interrogatory.  But  as  CS 
with  simple,  direct  questions  is  rare,  cf.  Ges.  Gr.  153,  2,  Bachmann  prefers  to  regard  it  as  the  CS  of  obtestation  :  « if 
shield  or  spear  were  seen  !  "  i.  e.  they  were  not  seen.  So  also  Bertheau,  Gesenius,  Furst  (in  their  Lexicons),  and  many 
others.  —  Tb.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  6-8.     After  the  days  of  Shamgar,   "^Sl 

n3J2K7.  The  difficulty  of  the  passage  can  scarcely 
be  removed,  if,  as  is  usually  done,  the  preposition 
2  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  "  in,"  "  during."  During 
the  days  of  Shamgar  such  misery  cannot  have 
come  upon  Israel.  The  narrator  could  not  in  that 
case  have  said  of  him.  ch.  iii.  31,  that  he  "  delivered 
Israel,"  just  as  (ver.  15)  he  speaks  of  Ehud  as  a 
"  deliverer."  If  Shamgar  was  no  deliverer,  how 
can  it  be  said  "and  after  him  (or  like  him,  i.  e. 
Ehud,  cf.  on  ch.  iii.  31)  was  Shamgar  3  "  It  seems 
impossible  to  assume  (as  nevertheless  Keil  also 
does),  that  the  poetess  could  say  of  the  days  of  such 
a  hero,  that  there  was  no  resistance  and  defense,  no 
sword  or  shield,  in  Israel.  The  disparaging  connec- 
tion in  which,  were  this  assumption  true,  it  would 
please  her  to  exhibit  the  hero,  is  also  wholly  at  va- 
riance with  her  spirit.  To  this  must  be  added  that, 
as  was  above  shown  to  be  probable,  Shamgar's 
famous  exploit  and  further  activity  fall  within  the 
eighty  years  of  "  rest "  after  Ehud.  At  all  events, 
Shamgar's  fame  is  related  before  the  time  in  which 
Israel  again  begins  to  sin,  and  consequently  again 
falls  into  servitude.  It  cannot  therefore  be  other- 
wise understood,  than  that  Deborah  retraces  the 
misery  of  her  people  up  to  the  time  of  this  last  hero. 
"  Since  the  days  of  Shamgar,"  i.  e.  upon  and  after 
his   days,   the   highways   began    to   be   deserted.1 

1  The  use  of  2  in,  in  the  sense  of  upon  =  after,  cannot 
be  considered  surprising,  when  the  poetical  freedom  of  the 
^nguage  is  taken  into  account.     Even  our  German   auf 

"upon  "  or  "on  "),  of  which  Grimm  says  that  in  many 
»sefl  it  has  appropriated  the  meaning  of  in,  affords  an  m- 

tance  of  the  same  kind.  To  pass  by  other  examples,  we 
also  say  with  equal  propriety,  ftin  melen   tagen  "  (in   many 


Philologically,  this  form  of  expression  is  not  with- 
out analogies.     God  says  (Num.  xiv.  11),  "They 

believe  not  me,  iTlPSn  732,  in,  i.  e.  after  "  all 
the  wonders  I  have  done  among  them."  In  the 
same  manner  we  are  to  interpret  vD2  in  several 

passages  of  Isaiah  (ch.  ix.  11  (12);  v.  25;  x.  4): 
"  the  Syrians  and  Philistines  devour  Israel,  —  in 
all  that,  after  all  that,  notwithstanding  all  that,  his 
anger  is  not  turned  away."  Thus  the  sense  of 
our  passage  also  becomes  clear.  Notwithstand- 
ing that  the  days  of  Shamgar  have  been,  i.  e.  after 
them,  misery  began.  His  heroic  deed  against  the 
Philistines,  was  the  last  great  act  performed  by  1>- 
rael.  But  the  author  adds,  "  in,  after,  the  days  of 
Jael."  That  this  cannot  be  the  stout-hearted  wo- 
man who  slew  Sisera,  is  self-evident,  since  Deborah, 
speaking  of  her  contemporary,  could  not  say  "  in 
the  days  of  Jael."  But  apart  from  this,  the  Song 
itself  (ver.  24)  distinguishes  this  Jael  by  carefully 
designating  her  as  the  "  wife  of  Heber,  the  Kenite. 
Moreover,  Jael  is  properly  a  man's  name.  The 
other  assumption,  however,  that  Jael  was  a  Judge, 
who  lived  before  Deborah's  time,  rests  on  slender 
foundations.  It  is  utterly  inconceivable  that  the 
narrator,  who  communicates  the  Song  of  Deborah, 
had  he  so  understood  it,  would  not  have  told  us 
something  of  this  Judge  Jael.  He  would  at  all 
events  have  inserted  his  name,  at  least  in  some  such 
manner  as  that  of  Shamgar  himself,  of  Elon  the 
Zebulonite,  and  of  Abdon   (Judg.  xii.  11-15),  of 

days),  and  "  nach  vitlen  tagtn  "  (after  many  days),  not  only 
when  the  reference  is  to  the  future,  but  even  when  it  is  tc 
the  past.  —  Although  Shamgar  slew  tte  Philistines  with  an 
ox-goad,  that  fact  cannot  explain  the  non-employment  of 
sword  and  lance  in  ver.  S  of  the  Song ;  for,  as  Barak's 
heroes  show  (ch.  iv.  16),  there  is  no  want  of  weapons,  bu' 
of  courage  to  use  them. 


94 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


whom  nothing  is  reported  beyond  the  general  fact 
that  the)- judged  Israel.  The  only  remaining  sup- 
position, and  one  fully  accordant  with  the  poetic 
cast  of  the  Song,  is,  that  Jael  was  the  knightly 
surname  of  Shamgar,  or  even  more  probably  of 
Ehud.  We  know  that  Gideon  is  frequently  men- 
tioned by  his  heroic  name  Jerubbaal,  and  that  Sam- 
son is  simply  styled  Bedan  (1  Sam.  xii.  11).  That 
Jael  might  readily  become  the  beautiful  popular 
designation  of  a  man  so  determined  and  rapid  in 
his  movements  as  Ehud,  is  evident,  whether  we 
take  it  to  mean  the  Mountain-climber,  the  August 
One,  the  Prince,  or  the  Rock-goat,  whose  facile 
ascent  to  the  most  inaccessible  rocky  heights  is  as- 
tonishing.    Most  probably,  however,  the  name  is 

connected  with  the  word  7',^1n,  to  help.  The 
same  word,  which  is  often  used  negatively  concern- 
ing heathen  gods  (^  s^VV  S7,  "  they  help  not,"  1 
Sam.  xii.  21,  Jer.  ii.  8,  etc.),  is  here  employed 
positively  to  denote  one  who  was  a  "  Helper  "  of 
Israel  in  distress.  The  sense,  moreover,  becomes 
thus  perfectly  clear  :  "  After  the  days  of  Shamgar, 
after  the  days  of  Jael  (Ehud),"  the  people  perished 
through  their  sins ;  that  is,  as  ch.  iv.  1  asserts,  and 
ver.  8  of  this  chapter  confirms,  —  "  they  had  chosen 
themselves  new  gods." 

The  highways  were  deserted,  jTimS,  ^  ;"Tn: 
literally,  they  ceased  to  be  highways.  No  one 
travelled  on  the  public  roads,  because  there  was  no 
security.  The  enemy  plundered  all  through  the 
country.  He  who  was  obliged  to  travel,  sought 
out  concealed  by-paths,  in  order  to  elude  the  ty- 
rant and  his  bands.  These  few  lines  give  a  strik- 
ing picture  of  a  land   languishing   under  hostile 

oppression.    TiT"J2  ^  v"jn,   open  places,   hamlets, 

ceased  to  exist.  I^T1?  *3  tQe  °Peu  country,  in  dis- 
tinction from  cities  surrounded  by  walls  and  gates. 
One  imagines  himself  to  be  reading  a  description  of 
the  condition  of  Germany  in  the  10th  century, 
when  the  Magyars  invaded  the  land  (cf.  Widukind, 
Sachs.  Gesch.  i.  32).  Henry  I.  is  celebrated  as  a 
builder  of  cities,  especially  because  by  fortifying 
open  villages  he  rendered  them  more  secure  than 
formerly  against  the  enemy.  All  ancient  exposi- 
tors, Greek  as  well  as  Chaldee  and  later  Rabbinic, 

consent  to  this  explanation  or  "J1T"H2  i  (cf.  Schnur- 
rer,  p.  46).  Ver.  8  also  agrees  with  it:  no  place 
without  walls  was  any  longer  secure  against  the 
hostile  weapons  of  those  who  oppressed  Israel ; 
the  conflict  was  pushed  even  to  the  very  gates  of 
the  mountain  fortresses.  The  attempt  to  make  the 
word  mean  "  princes,"  "  leaders,"  labors  under 
great  difficulties  ;  which  modern  expositors,  almost 

1  Keil  also  has  adopted  it. 

2  L  Wordsworth  :  (t  Until  that  1  Deborah  arose.  Deborah, 
as  an  inspired  person,  looks  at  herself  from  an  external  point 
of  view,  and  speaks  of  herself  objectively,  considering  all  her 
fcct6  as  due,  not  to  herself,  but  to  the  Spirit  of  God.  She 
does  not  praise  herself,  but  blesses  God  who  acted  in  her : 
K>  did  Moses  (see  Num.  xii.  3),  and  so  Samuel  (1  Sam.  xii. 
11).  —  Tr.) 

8  1/olated  interpretations  of  the  Middle  Ages,  taken  up  by 
ft  few  moderns,  and  the  subject  in  Elohim,  as  if  "  God  had 


all  of  whom  have  adopted  it,  have  by  no  means 
overcome.      It  raises  an  internal  contradiction  to 

connect  ^in  with  I^T1^'  when  taken  in  this 
sense.  We  can  very  properly  say  1  v^n  S^syi, 
"  the  hungry  cease  to  be  such,"  but  not  "  princes." 
Of  a  banished  dynasty  there  is  no  question.  A 
Judge  there  was  not;  none  therefore  could  cease 
to  be.  The  lack  of  military  virtue  is  first  men- 
tioned in  ver.  8.  Situated  as  Israel  was,  the  mis- 
ery of  the  people  might  be  measured  by  the  extent 
to  which  their  fields  and  rural  districts  were  devas- 
tated and  rendered  insecure.  As  to  their  "  princes," 
their  hereditary  chiefs,  they  in  fact  still  existed. 
Nor  does  the  form  of  the  word  need  any  correction 
(cf.  ver.  11). 

Till  I  arose  (^3^27  IV  for^Pi?  ^Vj  T?) 
a  mother  in  Israel:  -  who,  as  it  were,  bore  Israel 
anew.  It  was  the  regeneration  of  Israel's  nation- 
ality that  was  secured  at  the  Kishon.  How  came 
it  about  (she  adds,  ver.  8),  that  Israel  had  so  fallen 
as  to  need  a  new  mother  ?  They  had  chosen  "  new 
gods  "  for  themselves.  The  eternal  God.  before 
whom  the  mountains  trembled.  Him  they  had  for- 
saken. Hence  the  loss  of  all  their  strength.  They 
were  hard  pressed,  up  to  the  very  gates  of  their  for- 
tresses. (QT?$  is  not  simply  war,  but  an  already 
victorious  and  consuming  oppression.)  Resistance 
in  the  open  field  there  was  none  anywhere.  Among 
forty  thousand  not  one  sought  safety  by  means  of 
sword  and  shield.3  The  poet  says  "  m  »•  gods,"  not 
"other  gods."  The  objective  idea  is  of  course  the 
same,  but  not  the  subjective  thought  as  here  enter- 
tained. For  Israel  had  from  of  old  its  everlast- 
ing God,  —  Him  whose  glory  the  poem  had  deline- 
ated at  the  outset.  But  instead  of  that  God,  Israel 
chose  them  new  gods,  whom  they  had  not  formerly 
known.  There  is  a  profoundly  significant  connec 
tion  of  thought  between  this  passage  and  the  Song 
of  Moses,  Dent,  xxxii.  17.  There  the  thought, 
which  is  here  implied,  lies  fully  open  :  "  They  shall 
sacrifice  to  gods  whom  they  never  knew,  to  new 
gods,  that  came  newly  up,  whom  their  fathers 
feared  not."  The  heathen  gods  of  Canaan  are  in 
truth  all  new  to  Israel ;  for  then-  own  God  had 
already  chosen  them  in  the  desert,  before  ever  they 
set  foot  in  the  land.  Israel's  recent  ruin  was  the 
consequence  of  their  serving  these  new  gods.  That 
all  manliness  had  vanished,  that  servitude  prevailed 
up  to  the  gates  of  their  fortresses,  that  they  were 
shut  out  from  highway,  hamlet,  and  fountain,  was 
the  bitter  fruit  of  their  unfaithfulness  to  their  an- 
cient God.  Nor  was  deliverance  possible,  until,  as 
the  result  of  Deborah's  efforts,  the  people  became 
regenerated  by  means  of  the  ancient  truth. 

chosen  new  things.''  But  ver.  8  itself  opposes  this  construc- 
tion, to  sav  nothing  of  the  contradiction  which  it  involves 
with  the  whole   course  of  thought.     To  adopt    Kemink's 

correction,  D  tTSn,    "  God  chose  women,"  would  only  in- 

•    T   -  ' 

crease  the  distortion  of  the  hymn,  which  even  without  this 
would  arise  from  the  change  of  subject.  That  not  Elohim 
but  Jehovah,  would  be  used,  were  God  the  subject,  is  re- 
marked by  Bertheau  (p.  88),  who  in  his  turn,  however,  un- 
fortunately gives  a  wrong  sense  to  Elohim. 


CHAPTER   V.   9-11. 


t>5 


THE   SVMM0N8    TO   PRAISE    GOD   FOR   DELirERAXCX. 

Vers.  9-11. 

9  My  heart  (was)  with  the  Orderers  of  Israel, 

Who  devoted  themselves  among  the  people,  —  Praise  God ! 

10  Ye  who  ride  on  beautifully-saddled  asses, 

Who  sit  on  mats, 

And  walk  through  ways,  —  Sing ! 

11  Instead  of  the  cry  of  the  contending  at  the  cisterns, 

They  praise  there  the  benefaction  of  God, 

The  benefaction  of  his  freedom  in  Israel, — 

When  the  People  of  God  hastened  down  to  the  gates. 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  9.  Deborah  has  delineated,  first,  the  glori- 
ous majesty  of  God ;  then,  in  contrast  therewith,  the 
ruin  which  overtook  Israel  because  it  forsook  Him, 
and  chose  new  gods  who  cannot  help,  till  slie  arose, 
a  mother  in  Israel.  With  that  she  returns  to  the 
beginning.  For  what  had  she  done?  She  had 
called  on  the  people  to  turn  back,  and  consecrate 
themselves  to  God.  When  everything  lay  pros- 
trate, Barak  and  his  faithful  followers  hail  taken 
the  vows  of  God  upon  themselves.  If  Deborah 
had  become  a  "  strong  one  "  (gibbor)  in  Israel,  so 
had  those  who  followed  her  inspiring  call.  If  she 
speaks  of  herself  as  Deliverer,  it  is  not  without  in- 
cluding those  to  whom  she  imparted  her  faithful 
and  courageous  "  heart."  Ver.  9  resumes  ver.  2. 
The  ground  of  all  her  praise,  is  that  Israel  turned 
again  to  God.  This  had  been  stated  in  ver.  2  ; 
here,  by  way  of  farther  transition  from  ver.  7, 
she  adds  the  expression  "  my  heart :  "  she  has  in- 
fused the  new  spirit  into  Israel.  She  has  imparted 
her  heart  to  the  people,  as  a  mother  to  her  children. 
The  "  heart "  is  the  seat  of  divine  inspirations  and 
hopes  ;  it  is  the  organ  that  praises,  desires,  and 
seeks  after  God.  The  contents  of  Deborah's  heart 
flowed  over  into  Israel.  "If  thou  wilt  go  with 
me,"  says  Barak,  "  then  I  will  go."  "My  heart," 
she  exclaims,  "  was  with  the  orderers  of  Israel," 
with  those  who  devoted  themselves,  so  that  they 
devoted  themselves,  when  they  devoted  themselves  as 

s3i?n  of  Israel.1  The  explanation  of  H|?.(?n  has 
been  thought  more  difficult  than  it  is.  It  has 
already  been  remarked  above,  that  the  duty  of  a 
Judge  was  to  execute  the  mishpat,  the  law  of  Israel, 
according  to  the  ordinances  of  Moses.  Whenever 
a  Judge  reintroduced  the  observance  of  the  law, 
Jivine  order  sprang  up  anew  among  the  people. 

Now,  PH  and  UStTp  are  ever  conjoined  (cf.  Ex. 
xv.  25).  "  What  nation  is  there,"  asks  Deut. 
iv.  8,  "that  has  such  ehukkim  and  mishpalim?" 
"Hear,  O  Israel,  "reiterates  Moses, in  Deut.  v.  1, 
"  the  ehukkim  and  mishpatim  which  I  speak  in  your 
sars."  "Joshua  made  a  covenant  with  the  people 
(Josh.  xxiv.  25),  and  set  them  chok  and  mishpat." 
What  the  Sho/jhet  is  for  the  mishpat,  that  the 
Chokek  is  for  the  chok.  Both  words  have  the  same 
[1  In  this  sentence  our  author  seems  to  combine  two 
lifforent  explanations  of  ^3  ,,  eta.,  namely  :  1-  I  imparted 
By  spirit  to  the  t(  Orderers  "  of  Israel,  by  virtue  of  which 
hey  became  such  ;  and,  2.  My  heart  loves  those  who  proved 


grammatical  form  ;  both  have  the  same  historical 
relations.  Whoever  watched  over  the  chok  of  Is- 
rael, was  a  chokek.  They  were  the  Orderers  of 
Israel  ;  for  chok  is  the  "  order  "  resulting  from  law. 
The  men  who  followed  Deborah,  the  leaders  of 
the  people,  who  staked  their  lives  for  Israel's 
nationality  in  God,  were  not  shophetim,  —  for  that 
word  was  already  used  in  a  definitely  restricted 
sense ;  but  to  the  name  chokekim,  which  the  prophet- 
ess gives  them,  they  were  justly  entitled.  They 
were  men  of  law  and  national  order. 

Ver.  10.  Praise  God.  The  Song  of  Deborah 
is  a  hymn  of  praise  to  God  :  praise  forms  the  key- 
note to  all  its  variations.  The  refrain  of  ver.  2 
is  here  repeated,  because  the  thought  of  ver.  2  has 
come  up  in  a  new  form.  The  arrangement  of  the 
poem  is  delicate  and  beautiful.  Ver.  2  called  on 
all  to  praise  God.  Thereupon  she  herself  began 
to  sing,  ver.  3  :  "  I  will  praise  ; "  her  own  per- 
sonality comes  to  view  in  her  song  of  God,  and 
again  in  the  saving  power  through  which  she 
became  a  mother  of  Israel.  From  ver.  9  she  trans- 
fers the  work  of  praise  to  others.  The  self-devo- 
tion of  "  her  heart "  had  communicated  itself  to 
the  people.  "Praise  God,"  she  resumes;  but  now 
they  are  to  sing  who  have  been  delivered,  and  en- 
joy the  fruits  of  victory.  The  whole  Song  is  a 
hymn  of  freedom.  How  extreme  and  miserable 
was  the  recent  oppression  !  The  country  was  full 
of  danger,  intercourse  interrupted,  life  enslaved. 
But  now  everything  is  free  again.  Every  kind  of 
movement  is  practicable.  The  highways  are  secure 
Therefore,  praise  is  to  employ  all  who  enjoy  this 
return  of  rest.  Whoever  now  is  able  to  travel, 
without  being  hindered,  robbed,  or  put  in  peril  of 
his  life,  is  to  thank  God  who  restored  him  this 
privilege.      They  who  can   ride,  rest,  or  walk  in 

pe again  —  for   now  animals   are   not  stolen, 

tents  are  not  plundered,  foot-travellers  are  not  mur- 
dered, —  are  to  know  and  proclaim  the  precious- 
ness  of  this  new  blessing.  It  is  the  habit  of  Bibli- 
cal writers  to  comprehend  the  various  movements  of 
persons  under  the  terms  "  walking,  standing,  and 
sitting"  (cf.  Ps.  i.  1).  Here,  where  the  freedom 
of  the  open  country  is  spoken  of,  riding  is  naturally 
mentioned  in  the  place  of  standing,  which  was  in- 
cluded in  the  other  expressions.     The  riders   are 

represented  as  riding  on  iTHnS  fTlinS.      To 

themselves  "  Orderers,"  etc.     The  latter  explanation,  merely 
hinted  at  by  Dr.   Cassel,  is  that  commonly  adopted    oy  ex 
positore.     Bachmann  remarks  that  if  the  first  idea  had  been 
intended,  it  would   have  been  more  clearly  expressed 
Ta.] 


90 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


nde  on  asses,  was  certainly  a  well-known  custom 
(cf.  Judg.  x.  4;  xii.  14)";  but  the  mention  of 
"  white,"  or  as  it  is  commonly  rendered,  "  white- 
dappled  "  asses,  would  not  be  very  suitable.    Even 

though  the  connection  of  the  word  iTlTTlS  with 
those  roots  which  signify  "  to  glisten,"  should  be 
finally  established,  still  "it  will  always  seem  more 
appropriate  to  refer  it  to  the  beautiful,  ornamented 
coverings  that  served  for  saddles.  But  there  seems 
to  be  also  a  philological  affinity  between  tsachar 
and  what  the  Greeks  and  Romans  called  crdypa, 
trdyii,  sagma,1  and  the  Germans  saumsattel  (pack- 
saddle).  Asses,  we  know,  carried  burdens:  pro- 
visions, corn,  wine,  etc.  (Gen.  xlii.  25;  xlv.  23;  1 
Sam.  xxv.  18;  cf.  Bochart,  Hieroz.  i.  184).  They 
are  to  this  day  the  important  beast  of  burden  in 
Palestine ;  and"  to  leave  the  ass  unladen,  even  on 
6teep  mountain  paths,  is  considered  injurious 
(Ritter,  xvii.  295).  The  Targum  (Jonathan),  in 
its  rendering  of  Lev.  xv.  9,  uses  the  word  criyi\ ;  tor 

S3T,  and  not  S3  iT,  is  to  be  read  in  its  text  at 
that  place  (a  fact  overlooked  by  Sachs,  Beiirage 
zur  £>pracl{f.,  note  2,  196).  The  thought  suggests 
itself  naturally  that  restored  freedom  and  security 
must  have  been  of  special  value  to  those  who  trans- 
ported important  and  costly  articles.  The  passage 
becomes  peculiarly  significant,  if  brought  into  con- 
nection with  the  safety  of  traffic  and  intercourse, 
consequent  upon  the  enemy's  destruction.  —  And 
sit  on  mats.  Since  here  also  the  blessings  of  free- 
dom are  the  subject  of  discourse,  those  only  can  be 
meant  who  were  accustomed  to  sojourn  in  tents 
and  tent-villages.  "  To  spread  the  covering,"  and 
"  to  pitch  the  tent,"  are  to  this  day  equivalent 
expressions.  "  To  sit  on  cloths,"  was  the  poetic 
phrase  for  dwelling  in  the  open  country,  in  ham- 
lets, oases,  and  on  highways,  without  needing  the 

protection  of  walls  and  fortifications.    T^t?  (mats) 

is  undoubtedly  a  plural  of  T?,  garment.  It  is  in 
keeping  with  the  make  of  ancient,  especially  of 
oriental  dress,  that  the  various  terms  for  garment, 
covering,  cloth,  are  more  indefinite  and  inter- 
changeable than  in  modern  times.'2  Such,  for  in- 
stance, is  the  case  with  "13?,  garment  (Num.  iv. 
6-13) ;  compare  also  HOS,  covering  (Dent.  xxii. 
12).  For  the  establishment  of  this  general  signifi- 
cation of  ],,=IQ)  Teller  has  rendered  meritorious 
service.  In  a  manuscript  note  in  a  copy  of  his 
"  Notte  Critical,"  now  in  my  possession,  he  directs 
attention  to  i/Mirtoy  as  a  cognate  word.  At  all 
events,  that  also  has  the  double  sense  of  garment 
and  covering,  or  cloth.  The  same,  as  is  well  known, 
is  the  case  with  eVSiis  and  vestis.  The  word,  mats 
(Latin,  matta).  in  the  translation  above,  is  used 
merely  for  the  sake  of  assonance  ;  a  philological 
connection  between  it  and  the  Hebrew  word  is  not 

1  For  further  philological  comparisons,  see  Benfey,  i.  433, 
anil  Dieffeobach,   Cellica,  i.  85. 

2  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  use  of  the  articles  them- 
lelves.  The  popular  custom  of  spreading  out  garments, 
like  carpets  or  cloths,  for  persons  to  ride  or  walk  over,  is 
sufficiently  familiar  from  the  history  of  our  Lord  and  the 
usages  of  both  Greeks  and  Romans. 

8  [It   does  not  appear  how  a  piel  rT£Si"T  can  possibly  be 

utained   from  a  niphal  i~t"3.     The  form  C"!in!2,   in 

the  text,  can  only  be  derived  from  VVT^,  either  directly  or 
Indirect  1\ .      In  the  latter  case  it  would  be  a  denominative 


discoverable. —  "ST").'!!"'?  '>57i^>  foot-travellers, 
on  the  proper  public  roads.  They  too  are  no 
longer  driven  to  seek  winding  paths.  All,  whether 
they  ride,  sit,  or  walk,  have  become  free.  There- 
fore, sing  praise  to  God !  ^n^,  to  celebrate  in 
song,  as  the  Psalmist  uses  it  (Ps.  cxlv.  5) :  "  Words 
of  thy  wonders  will  I  sing"  (nrVtpS). 

Ver.  11.  The  prophetess  continues  to  depict 
the  wonderful  change  from  servitude  to  freedom 
While  the  enemy  had  the  upper  hand,  there  was 
security  only  within  the  gates  ;  up  to  the  threshold 
of  these,  the  inhabitants  were  hunted  and  pursued 
A  lively  conception  of  such  a  condition  of  society, 
may  be  obtained  from  the  history  of  Germany  from 
the  13th  to  the  16th  century,  when  it  often  hap- 
pened that  large  cities  were  at  war  with  theit 
neighbors.  In  Palestine,  cities  being  built  on  hill- 
tops, water  must  be  procured  outside  of  the  gates. 
It  was  at  a  well,  at  the  time  of  water-drawing 
(Gen.  xxiv.  11).  that  Eliezer  met  Rebecca,  coming 
out  of  the  city.  In  time  of  war,  this  water-draw- 
ing was  a  dangerous  occupation.  The  crowd  was 
great,  and  every  one  wished  to  be  the  first  to  get 
away.  Consequently,  there  was  no  lack  of  con- 
tention and  vociferation.  How  all  that  is  changed  ! 
Now  the  maidens  draw  leisurely  and  merrily,  prais- 
ing God  the  while,  who  has  restored  quiet  and 
security.  The  philological  explanation  agrees  per- 
fectly with  this  exposition.  Verse  11  does  not  de- 
pend on  ver.    10;  it   introduces  a   new   thought. 

□^np  is  to  be  taken  or  read  as  D^Viip,  /.  e. 

as  participle  of  the  piel  HSH,  to  strive,  quarrel, 
rixari  (cf.  Num.  xxvi.  9  ;  Ps.  lx.  2  ;  etc.),  con- 
nected with  the  niphal  i"^?*  often  used  of  persons 
who  strive  and  contend  with  each  other  (Deut- 
xxv.  11 ;  Ex.ii.  13  ;  etc.).3  The"voice"  of  those 
who  thus  contend  is  wont  to  attract  attention  ;  aud 

a  voice  is  now  also  heard :  'ISi'V  Ett\  there  they 
sing  aloud,  there  resounds  the  song  of  those  who 
praise  the  mercy  of  God.  O^O?  from  H^P,  piel, 
imperfect,  3d  person,  plural,  to  sound,  to  sing; 
Sanskrit,  tana,  t6vos,  German  tonen.)  The  harsh 
voice  of  contention  is  replaced  by  the  sounds  of 
praise.  The  burden  of  this  praise  ?  The  benefits 
ot  God  —  the  benefits  which  his  all-disposing.arm 
has  bestowed  on  Israel,  in  that,  after  their  self-sur- 
render and  return  to  Him,  He  has  made  them  free 
again  from   the  enemy.     The  consequence  of  his 

interposition  is  T^?,  freedom :  Israel  is  free 
again,  and  no  longer  depends  on  walls  for  safety. 
Tin?  is  derived  from  **?S,  just  as  1^211  from 

'?n.  It  contains  the  notion  of  that  which  is  free, 
of  freedom,  as  it  is  expressed  by  the  prophet  Zech- 
ariah,  quite  in  the  spirit  of  our  Song,  when  he  says 

from  \*71,  an  arrow,  aud  would  mean  "  archers  ;  "  so  Ber- 
theau,  Keil.  aud  many  other  interpreters,  both  ancient  and 
modern.     Many,  perhaps  most  expositors,  however,  prefei 

the  direct  derivation  from    rt-'H.    to   divide,  but  with  va 

'  -  T 
rious  modifications  of  the  radical  idea.  For  a  full  discussion 
of  the  word  and  the  interpretations  it  has  received,  see  Bach 
mann,  i.  pp.  351-359  ;  it  must  suffice  here  to  say  that  he 
translates  it,  B*utetheilenden,  "  those  who  divide  the  spoil  *' 
They  (he  explains)  who  frequent  the  places  of  drawing 
water  are  to  praise  the  righteous  acts  of  Jehovah,  with  the 
jovful  voice  of  those  who  divide  the  spoil,  cf.  Isa.  lx.  2  (8) 
—  Tr.J 


CHAPTER   V.    12-23.  97 


(chipter  ii.  8,  9  (4,  5)):  "Jerusalem  shall  dwell 
open  (JT!fT9,  i.  e.  without  walls) ;  and  I,  saith  the 
Lord,  will  be  unto  her  a  wall  of  tire  round  about.' 


11, — when  they  devoted  themselves  to  God,  VPJJ  TH 

C,-l_i?tS?7.  When  the  people  apostatized,  they  were 


When  Israel  devotes  itself  to  God,  it  is  at  rest;  pressed  up  to  their  very  gates,  and  fled;  when,  by 
accordingly,  after  the  deeds  of  the  several  Judges  '  sell-surrender,  they  became  a  people  of  God,  they 
are  related,  it  is  constantlv  added,  "  and  the  land  ™shed  boldl.v  down  to  the  gatt's  and  through  them. 
had  rest."  Then  enemies  are  powerless ;  exposed  '  1  he  consequence  ot  the  first  was  flight ;  that  ot  the 
hamlets  are  secure;  God  is  their  protection.  There,  i  see°nd-  impetuous  attack.1  In  the  fonner  case, 
at  the  cisterns,  they  praise  the  goodness  of  God  a"10nr  t0,rt,v  '"uusand  there  was  not  a  man  capa 
which  manifests  itself  in  this  newly  recovered  free-  bl?  ™  making  resistance  ;  m  the  latter  —  and  here 
,jorn  "  with  the  bong  enters  on  the  delineation  of  the  con- 

When  the  people  of  God  hastened  down  to  tliet.  —  it  was  a  small  band  who  threw  themselves 
the  gates.  Here  also  the  beauty  of  the  internal  ar-  nP°}\ tUv  ?¥"/•  In  vel's:  9_1 1  the  prophetess,  by 
rangement  of  the  Songcomes  prominently  to  view.  P«"smg  God  tor  freedom,  mterrupted  the  progress 
Verse  8  says,  they  chose  themselves  new  gods,  ot  her  bonfer  *  narrative,  just  as  she  does  in  vers. 
h<  _.,.,;  __,i,   ,.,'  ;  3-5  and  in  ver.  12,  to  which  and  the  following  verses 

"  7?*    LU,   "?  ;  verse  9  — interrupted  by  the   we  now  pass  on. 
praise  of  God,  but  resumed  in  the  last  line  of  ver. 

1  [Keil  and  others  connecc  the  last  clause  of  ver.  11,  not  enemy  (ver.  6  f.)  —  entered  again  into  the  plains  of  the  land, 
with  ver.  9  ;  but  with  the  immediately  preceding  praise  for  into  the  cities  now  relieved  of  enemies."  Similarly,  Bach- 
victory.  fc  Atter  this  victory,"  says  Keil,  "  the  people  de-  „  „  ,  x  ,  .  fc. »  -  .  . 
•ended  again  to  its  gates,  from  the  mountains  and  hiding-  ,  mann'  Dr'  CaSSel  S  translatwa  of  W  by  >  when  Is 
pl»ces  whither  it  had  betaken   itself  for  safety  from  the  \ the  ""S8  of  *«  word.—  Tn.) 


Delineation  of  tbe  victors  and  the  tiotomt. 
Vers.  12-23. 

12  Awake,  awake  Deborah  ! 
Awake,  awake,  compose  the  song  ! 
Barak,  arise  !  —  conquer  thy  conquest, 
Thou  son  of  Abinoara  ! 

13  Then  down  against  the  robust  rushed  a  remnant, 

The  People  of  God  rushed  with  me  against  the  powerful.1 

14  From  Ephraim's  stock,  the  victors  of  Amalek  ; 
After  thee  (marched)  Benjamin  against  thy  foes,2 
Masters  came  from  Machir, 

Men  skillful  with  the  accountant's  pencil 8  distinguished  Zebulun. 

15  But  the  first  *  in  Issachar  were  with  Deborah, 
Yea,  Issachar  was  the  basis  of  Barak. 

When  into  the  valley  his  men  threw  themselves  on  foot,6  — 
While  by  the  brooks  abode  Reuben's  great  investigators.6 

16  Why  sitt'st  thou  by  the  folds,  listening  to  the  shepherd's  flute? 
By  the  brooks  Reuben  has  great  scrutinizers. 

17  Gilead  stays  beyond  the  Jordan  : 

But.  Dan.  how  didst  tliou  sail    n  ships  !7 

Asher  sils  on  the  .sea  shore,  sheltered  in  his  bays, 

18  But  Zebulon  hazarded  his  soul  unto  death, 
With  Naphtali,  upon  the  high  plain  of  the  field. 

19  Kings  came  to  fight  —  Kings  of  Canaan  fought, 
At  Taanach  and  by  Megiddo's  waters. — 
Satisfaction-money 8  gained  they  none. 

20  From  heaven  strove  the  stars.9 

They  strove  from  their  stations  with  Sisera. 

21  Kishon's  stream  swept  them  away  — 

A  stream  of  succours  was  Kishon's  stream,  — 
Tread  strongly  on.  my  soul ! 10 

22  When  struck  the  sounding  hoof  of  the  rushing  steed, 


98  THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


Of  the  flying  strong  ones  !  n 
23  The  ban  on  Meroz,  commands  the  messenger  of  God,  the  ban  !  — 
The  ban  on  its  inhabitants  ; 

Because  they  came  not  to  the  help  of  the  people  of  God, 
Of  the  People  of  God  against  the  powerful.12 

TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL, 
fi  Ver.  13.  —  This  rendering  of  ver.  13  supposes  the  Hebrew  text  to  be  pointed  and  divided  thus  : 

a^-nsb  ma?  tv  ts 

A-     ■   -     :  ■   T  -T  T 

:  D"ni322   %b  TV  i"rijT  DV 

|.  .   -  •  -T  T  ; 

So  also  the  I  AY  (in  Cod.  Vat.)  and  many  expositors.  The  most  serious  objection  to  it  is,  that  as  it  is  the  easier  read* 
Ing,  the  Masorites  must  have  had  strong  traditional  grounds  for  preferring  one  more  difficult.  The  verse  has  been  trans* 
Lated  and  interpreted  in  a  great  variety  of  ways  ;  but  the  view  of   Dr.  Cassel  commends  itself  strongly,  especially  when 

compared  with  ch.  iv.  14.  Our  English  version  seems  to  take  TT*  as  imperf.  apoc.  Piel  from  iTT"^,  after  the  exam- 
ple of  several  Jewish  grammarians  and  interpreters. —  Tr.] 

[3  Ver.  14.  —  Dr.  Oassel's  rendering  of  the  first  line  of  ver.  14  —  pb.DVS  DttHtl?  D^IQM  *•??  —  lsi  Aux  Efra' 
im*s  Art,  die  Amalek sieger.  It  does  not  clearly  appear  how  he  would  translate  the  passage  literally,  but  the  following 
would  probably  express  his  view  :  tr  Out  of  Ephraim  (came)  their  root  (who  were)  against  Amalek.11  The  "root,'1  then, 
according  to  our  author's  exposition  (see  below),  would  be  Joshua,  in  his  relation  to  those  whom  he  led  to  victory  against 

"  AmMek."     So  far  as    ti?"^tI7   is  concerned,  this  interpretation  has  full  as  much  in  its  favor  as  that  which    makes  it 

mean  (t  dwelling-place."     On  the  rendering  of  TPTp^V,  see  the  commentary.     The  majority  of  expositors,  would  prob 
ably  accept  the  rendering  of  the  two  lines  given  by  Dr.  Robinson  (Bibl.  Repos.  1831) :  — 
"Out  of  Ephraim  (came  those)  whose  dwelling  is  by  Amalek  ; 
After  thw  fwasi  Benjamin  among  thy  hosts." 
But   in  a  document   the  language  ot  whicn  is  so  obscure  as  that  of   the  Song  of  Deborah,  much  necessarily  depends  on 
the  conception  formed  of  the  connection  in  which  one  passage  stands  with   another.     Now,  while  the    majority  of  inter- 
preters assume   that  ver.  14  speaks  of  such  aB  took  part  in  the  war  agaiust  Jabin  and  Sisera,  our  author  maintains  that 
it  dwells  on  the  fame  of   those  who  did  not  take  part  in  this  war,  in  order  by  this  comparison  to  exalt  that  of  those  who 
did.     On  the  decision  of  this  question  the  interpretation  in  detail  of  the  whole  verse  depends.      Which  of  the  two  conflict- 
ing views  is  true,  is  not  a  matter  to  be  discussed  here,  but  it   is  certain  that  ch.  iv.  is  very  favorable  to  our  author^  side, 
cf.  the  com.  belew.  —  Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  14.  — The  rendering  of  this  line  turns  on  ^23  IDDtZ?.  The  Targum.  Peshito,  and  most  ancient  expositors, 
explain  it  of  the  r<  stylus  of  the  writer  ;  "  while  most  moderns  translate  it  "  the  staff  of  the  leader.1'  Compare  the  remarki 
in  the  preceding  note.  —  Tr.]  . 

[4  Ver.  15.  —  Dr.  Cassel  nrobably  reads   ^™ 1tl7.    with  Bertheau,  Keil,  and  most  expositors.      The   preposition  3    after 

the  construct  state  is  not  unusual  in  poetry,  cf.  2  Sam.  i.  21  ;  Job  xviii.  2  :  etc.  Some  regard  H1t27  as  an  unusual  plu- 
ral (cf.  Ges.  Gram.  87, 1.  c),  or  as  an  archaic  form  of  the  construct  (so  Ewald,  Gram.  211.  c).  —  Tr.] 

[5  Ver.  15.  —  On  V^H-?j  compare  fr  Grammatical  "  note  on  ch.  iv.  10  ;  also  ch.  viii.  5  ;  2  Sam.  xv.  17 ;  etc.— 
Tr.] 

[6  Ver.  15.  —   D  •    ^PI7^  ;  ^r'  Cassel,  Ergriindler.     For   ^7    ^"lpH,  in  the  next  verse,  he   has   Ergriibler,  which 

admirably  reproduces  both  the  paranomaaia  and  the  irony  of  the  original,  ^ppfl  and  ^p-^  are,  of  course,  abstract 
nouns,  followed  by  the  genitive  of  the  subject  to  which  they  pertain.  — Tr.] 

[7  Ver.  17.  —  "  Aber  Dan,  was  zogst  du  auf  Schiffen  ans  !  "  Our  author  probably  takes  "A3  in  its  most  usual  sense, 
•'  to  sojourn  :  "  to  §cjourn  in  or  on  ships,  readily  suggesting  the  idea  of  sailing  in  ships.  Most  expositors  translate  !  "  And 
Dan,  why  abides  he  at  the  ships?  "     The  preposition  less  accusative  is  as  easy  or  as  difficult   in  one  case  as  in  the  other. 

Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  19.  —  P]D3    '  ^3:    Dr.  Cassel,    Geld  zur  Basse,  ,f  penance   money,"  cf.   the  Commentary  below.     Bertheau, 

Keil,  and  others,  takiug  3?^S  in  its  Arabic  sense  of  frustum  (cf.  the  root  17^£3),  translate  :  tr  not  a  piece  of  silver  did 
they  take  ; '■'  but  against  the  Hebrew  use  of  the  word.  —  Tr.] 

[9  Ver.  2C  — Dr.  Cassel.  following  many  previous  expositors,  alters  the  Masoretic  text  division  by  transferring  "the 
stars  "  from  the  second  to  the  first  clause.      But  it  is  justly  objected  to  this  change  that  it  reduces  the  second  clause  to  a 

mere  repetition  by  which  nothing  is  added  to  the  idea  already  expressed  in  the  first.  In  the  next  Hue,  the  word  n*  w?3 
•ignifief ,  '*  a  causeway,'1  ''  highway."  Dr.  Cassel's  rendering,  St  uteri,  places,  is  manifestly  chosen  for  the  sake  of  allitera- 
tion :    Sie  stritten  von  ihrtn  Statten  mil  Sisera;  compare  the  English  imitation  above. —  Tr.] 

[1*>  Ver-  21  —  TV  **tT^l  ^D^li^l.  This  line  has  been  very  variously  interpreted.  It  is  now  generally  agreed,  how- 
ever, that  it  is  an  address  of  the  Singer  to  herself.    ^3~"^j^l  is  the  jussive  of  the  second  person,  cf.   Ges.  Gram.  48,  ». 

?"*J  may  either  betaken  as  an  adverbial  accusative  (=TV2\  or  as  the  direct  object  after  the  verb.  Dr.  Cassel 
jfceides  for  the  former,  after  Herder,  Justi,  Bertheau,  Ewald,  Keil  ;  Dr.  Bachmann,  with  Schnurrer,  Kohler,  Holmann, 
»♦<■.,  prefers  the  latter,  and  takue  T3?  as  the  abstract  for  the  concrete  :  "Tread  down,  my  soul,  the  strong  ones  !  "  cf. 
KohKiiu.  in  Bihl.  Sacra.     In  either  case,  the  incitement  of  the  line  may  be  directed  to  the  continuation  of  the  Song,  or  tf 


CHAPTER  V.   12-23 


99 


the  prosecution  of  the  pursuit  of  the  enemy.  Bachmann  prefers  the  latter ;  but  the  former  seems  to  us  more  itrUlng 
end  appropriate.  —  Tr.] 

[11  Ter.  22.  — Dr.  Cassel:  — 

Da  dtr  Jagenden  Ross/iuf  hallend  aufsehlug, 

Der  entjagendtn  Starken. 

On  the  translation  of  TS  by  "  when,"  cf.  note  1,  on  p.  97.     In  the  second  line  of  the  above  rendering,  the  ]72   does  no* 

come  to  its  rights,  and  the  suffix  in  Vn2S  is  neglected.    The  ]0  is  causal,  and  the  suffix  V goes  back  to  the  col 

lective  D-O  of  the  first  line,  so  that  it  seems  necessary  to  explain  Z^^SS  of  men,  not,  as  our  author  (see  below) 
of  horses.  The  best  rendering  of  the  verse  is  probably  that  adopted,  for  substance,  by  Keil,  Bachmann,  and  many 
others : — 

"  Then  the  hoofs  of  the  horses  smote  the  ground, 
Because  of  the  galloping  of  their  valiant  riders." 

The  last  expression  may  very  well  be  taken  ironically  :  "runaway  heroes."  On  the  repetition  of  nVin1!,  to  indicate 
continuance,  see  Ewald,  Gram.,  313  a  ;  cf.  also  Ges.  Gram.  108,  4.  —  Tr.] 

[M  Ver  23.  —  On  the  above  translation  of  ver.  23  it  is  to  be  remarked,  1.  That  the  word  rendered  "  ban,"  is  "HS,  and 
does  not,  like  £"ir"T,  imply  the  actual  destruction  of  the  object  against  which  it  is  aimed.  2.  That  with  the  LXX 
(Cod.  Vat.)  our  author  transfers  ?HS  from  the  second  line  to  the  first.  On  the  construction  of  T1HK  (which  below 
but  not  here,  he  changes  (with  the  IVY,)  into  ~|!PS),  cf  Ges.  Gram.  131,  4  b.     3.  That  the  expression  "  People  of  God  ' 

Is  our  author's  interpretation  of  what  is  meant  by  r  coming  to  the  help  of  Jthovati,"  cf.  below.  4.  That  D"*~^232 
is  by  most  recent  expositors  rendered,  :I  among  (or,  with)  heroes,"  namely,  the  warriors  of  IsraeL  Compare  the  Septuagini 
and  Vulgate  ;  the  Targum   takes  2  in  the  hostile  sense.  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  12.  With  the  words  of  ver.  11,  "when  the 
People  of  God  hastened  down  to  the  gates,"  i.  e. 
out  to  battle,  the  prophetess  transfers  herself  into 
the  midst  of  the  conflict.  Verse  12  presents  a 
reminiscence   of  the   battle  song.      It  recalls   the 

rallying  cry.  Wake  up !  wake  up  !  '  *"flS  from 
"W7,  cf.  Isa.  li.  9.)  "Awake,  awake!"  is  ad- 
dressed to  Deborah,  urging  her  to  fire  the  soldiery 
tcrough  her  song ;  "  arise !  "  refers  to  Barak.    For 

she  sang,  and  Barak  fought.  *P3^i  ^W,  "  lead 
forth  thy  captives."  To  be  able  to  carry  away 
captives,  was  evidence  of  a  complete  victory.  When 
Jerusalem  and  Samaria  fell,  the  people  were  car- 
ried away  prisoners.  The  captivity  of  the  enemy 
ends  the  conflict.  The  reason  why  a  perpetual  ban 
of  destruction  was  pronounced  against  the  enemies 
who  attacked  the  host  of  Israel,  in  the  wilderness, 
near  Arad,  was  not  merely  that  they  fought  against 
Israel,  but  that  they  also  "  took  some  of  them  pris- 
oners" (Num.  xxi.  1).  The  completeness  of  God's 
victory,  as  the  68th  Psalm  celebrates  it,  is  indi- 
cated by  the  expression,  ver.  19  (18) :  "212?  fTOn?, 
"  thou  hast  carried  away  the  captives."  1 

Ver.  13.  The  prophetess  now  continues  to  depict 
the  surprising  contrasts  that  have  arisen  from  Is- 
rael's return  to  God.  A  T,~JIP,  a  remaining  few,  by 
no  means  all  Israel,  but  a  small  band  —  like  the  rem- 
nant (C,~T,-'.t"')  whom,  according  to  the  prophet 
loel  (ch.  ii.  32  (iii.  5)),  God  calls,  —  takes  up  the 
conflict  with  E,-,.',':TS.  mighty  ones.  (Cf.  my  dis- 
cussion on  Ps.  viii.  2,  in  the  Lirtherischen  Zeitschr., 

1860.  "Mighty  kings,"  OT^tM  3'1?1?'?,  are 
slain  by  God,  Ps.  cxxxvi.  18).  The  next  line  runs 
parallel  with  this :  "  the  people  of  God  (""TVP  DS) 

1  [According  to  Bachmann  the  first  half  of  ver.  12  con- 
tains the  self-incitement  of  Deborah  to  begin  the  description 
•f  the  battle,  while  the  second  half  actually  enters  or  the 
leecripUoo  with  a  reminiscence  of  ch.  iv.  14.  —  Tr.] 


charges  against2  gibborim."  Gibborim  are  warlike 
men  of  gigantic  strength.  It  is  applied  here  to 
enemies,  as  elsewhere  to  Nimrod,  who  also  was  an 
enemy.  In  the  view  of  Scripture,  God  alone  is  the 
true  Gibbor  (Deut.  x.  17,  etc.).  Usually,  the  gib- 
liorim  conquer  ;  but  here  the  result  is  that  of  which 
Isaiah  speaks  (ch.  xlix.  25),  "the  captives  of  the 
giblior  are  tak"n  away  from  him."  There  is  a  pe- 
culiar beauty  in  Deborah's  mode  of  stating  her  own 
share  in  the  war :  "  the  People  of  God  rushed  for 

me  (>7)  against  heroes."  For  my  sake,  she  sings, 
at  my  call,  with  me,  did  they  hazard  the  conflict 
with  men  of  superior  strength. 

Vers.  14-16.  It  was  truly  a  "remnant"  that 
fought  at  the  Kishon  against  Sisera.  It  was  only 
a  part  of  all  Israel  that  was  entitled  to  the  honor 
of  being  styled  the  "  People  of  God."  A  special 
renown  must  henceforth  attach  to  those  tribes  who 
took  part  in  the  war,  just  as  the  Athenians  never 
lost  the  glory  of  having  alone  gained  the  battle  of 
Marathon.  In  Israel,  as  in  Hellas,  rivalries  ob- 
tained between  the  different  tribes.  Considerations 
like  these  afford  the  proper  introduction  to  ver.  14. 
Expositors  have  made  its  difficulties  altogether  in- 
surmountable, by  supposing  that  all  the  tribes  here 
named  assisted  Barak.'  But  this  supposition  is 
utterly  untenable:  1.  The  statement  of  eh.  iv.  i= 
positive  and  definite,  that  only  Zebulun  and  Naph 
tali  fought  on  the  plains  of  Issachar.  It  is  more- 
over corroborated  by  the  fact  that,  from  her  resi- 
dence on  Mount  Ephraim,  Deborah  sends  to  just 
those  tribes,  because  the  oppression  under  which 
Israel  suffered  bore  heaviest  on  them.  2.  The 
question  whether  Ephraim  and  Benjamin  took  par 
in  the  war,  could  not  have  been  overlooked  liy  the 
narrator  ;  for  the  direction  of  the  march  which  he 
had  to  trace  was  altogether  different  from  what, 
had  they  been  combatants,  it  would  have  been. 
And  why,  in  that  case,  would  it  have  been  neces- 
sary for  Deborah  to  go  with  Barak  to  Kedesh  1 
3.  It  is  contradicted  by  ver.  14  itself.  Machir  means 

s  Q,|"iS332  -p\   cf.  jodg.  vu.  9,  rrinsa  "H ; 

also  Judg.  vii.  13. 

3  Keil  also  has  adopted  this  view. 


100 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


Gileail  proper.1  Manasseh  as  a  whole  cannot  be 
intended  by  it  (cf.  the  word  IT"!*).  It  is  for  the 
very  purpose  of  designating  a  part  that  the  term 
"  Machir  "  is  employed.  But  Deborah  herself  says. 
ver.  17,  that  Gilead  did  not  take  part  in  the  cam- 
paign- ^or  would  it  beat  all  apparent  why  Zebu- 
Inn  should  be  described  by  two  different  attributes 
(vers.  14  and  18),  in  relation  to  the  same  event. 
4.  If  those  tribes  took  part  in  the  conflict,  why 
does  vi  r.  18  sp  ak  only  of  Zebulun  ami  Xuphtali  ! 
The  Plataeans,  who  alone  stood  by  the  Athenians 
in  the  day  of  battle,  were  not  thus  forgotten.  The 
most  ancient  Jewish  expositors,  however,  already 
perceived  the  more  correct  view  to  be  taken  of  the 
verse :  it  is  to  be  historically  interpreted.  The 
poet's  mind,  like  the  action  itself,  moves  over  the 
northern  territory  of  Israel.  The  tribes  of  Judah 
and  Simeon  lie  altogether  beyond  her  present  field 
of  vision.  Bat  with  the  aucient glory  of  those  tribes, 
whose  territories  stretched  onward  from  Mount  |  xx.  2  5  ;  1 
Ephraim  —  from  the  spot  where  she  herself  resided,   xxxvi.  3 


(Gen.  1.  2.3).  It  is  only  by  supposing  that  the  re- 
nown of  Zebulun  also,  is  one  which  existed  pre 
vious  to  the  war,  that  what  is  here  said  can  be 
brought  into  easy  and  proper  connection  with  what 
is  said  in  ver.  18.    Zebulun.  formerlv  known  onh 


near  the  border  of  Benjamin,  — she  compares  that 
of  the  conquerors  whom  she  led  on.  Each  tribe 
had  its  own  glorious  traditions.  Xo  doubt,  ex- 
claims the  prophetess,  Ephraim  is  renowned,  for 
out  of  him  sprang  he  who  was  against  Amalek. 
The  ancients  rightly  understood  this  of  Joshua, 
the  conqueror  of  Amalek,-  the  pride  of  Ephraim, 
who  was  buried  among  them,  and  on  whom,  un- 
questionably, the  Ephraimites  always  founded  their 

claim  to  the  leadership  among  the  tribes. —  'T~?Q^' 

Tp^O^a  "pCTja,  after  thee,  Benjamin  against 

thine  enemies.     Since  tP£^2j?3  (Aram.  plur.  c. 

suffix)  manifestly  answers  to  P ;B5rr  the  ?.  which 
with  the  latter  means  "against,''  must  be  taken 
in  the  same  sense  with  the  former.  This  is  con- 
firmed by  the  fact  that  the  plural  of  33?  is  always :! 
applied  to  the  "  heathen,"  the  "  nations,"  and  car- 
ries  with   it  the  idea  of  hostility  against  Israel. 

tJ'S^V  means  the  hostile  nations  who  stand  ar- 
rayed against  thee, —  "thy  heathen,"  so  to  speak, 
"  thine  enemies."  "  After  thee,"  says  the  prophetess 
to  Ephraim,  "  Benjamin  advanced  against  thine 
enemies  "  —  Benjamin,  who  bears  the  name  of 
Wolf  (Gen.  xlix.  27).  It  is  the  fame  of  Ehud,  that 
renders  Benjamin  illustrious.  The  old  expositors 
understood  these  utterances  of  Deborah,  concern- 
ing Benjamin  and  the  other  tribes,  as  prophetic. 
But  such  an  explanation  cannot  be  accepted.  A 
prophetess  who  looked  into  the  boundless  and  in- 
definite future,  could  not  have  compared  tribe  with 
tribe  in  a  manner  possible  only  when  dealing  with 
the  facts  of  history.  —  By  the  side  of  the  warlike 
fame  of  Ephraim  and  Benjamin,  the  prophetess 
places  the  peaceful  renown  of  Machir  and  Zebulun. 
How  far  the  sons  of  Machir  distinguished  them- 
selves as  mechokekhn,  orderers  of  the  law,  we  have. 
it  is  true,  no  information.  But  it  is  to  be  noticed 
that  what  is  told  of  Jair,  Judg.  x.  4,  connects  itself 
witb  a  Jair  who  lived  as  early  as  the  time  ofMoses 
(Num.  xxxii  41).  The  sons  of  Machir  were  born 
''  upon  the   knees "   of  their  grandfather  Joseph 

1  Num.  xxxii.  39  ;  cf.  Josh   xvii.  3. 

2  «  In  the  land  of  Ephraim  "  there  was  a  Mount  of  Ama- 
wk,  cf.  Judg.  xii.  16. 

J  ["  Always  ''  is  too  strong  ;  cf.  Gen.  xlviii.  4  ;  Lev.  xxi. 
I;  B*k.  xviii.  18.  — Tr] 

4  As  in  conflicts  of  the  Bedouin  tribes,  the  Arab  women 
it  the  present  time  stili  stand  in  the  rear,  and  encourage 


for  his  IE"?  »3»3  D'OtpiE),  experts  with  the 
ciphering-pencil,  had  now  become  a  people  coura- 
geous unto  death.  Zebulun  was  a  commercial  tribe, 
like  Zidon.  The  purple-trade  especially  occupied 
them.  Consequently,  the  art  of  the  Sopher,  i.  e. 
writing,  reading,  and  ciphering,  could  not  fail  tfl 
be  extensively  practiced  in  this  tribe.  The  Sophi  r 
appears  also  in  Phoenician  inscriptions ;  Gesenius 
compares  him  with  the  quaestors  of  Carthage, 
held  an  office  next  in  importance  to  that  of  the 
Suffetes  ( Minium.  Phonic.,  173).  A  like  important 
office  was  held  by  the  iiopheriin  at  the  court.-  of  the 
Jewish  kimrs.  They  are  always  named  in  con- 
junction with  the  high-priest  (cf.  2   Sam.  viii.  17; 

Kgs    iv.  3;  1    Chron.  x\iii-    16;   1-a. 

2  Kgs.  xix.   2).     The  Sopher  and  the 


high-priest  count  the  money  found  in  the  offering 
box.  2  Kgs.  xii.  10  (11).     Kin-   Jn-iah    sends  his 

Sopher  Shaphan  QEtr,  cf.  JSS^bfc?.     Elizaphaii, 

a  Zcbulonite,  Num.  xxxiv.  25)  to  the  priest-  It  is 
he  who  reads  the  sacred  book,  which  the  priest  has 
found,  to  the  king  (2  Kgs.  xxii.  8).  The  com- 
mander-in-chief ha-  a  Sophi  r  who  eiiniUs  the  army 
(2  Kgs.  xxv.  19;  Jer.  lii.  25).  The  uncle  of 
David  is  celebrated  as  a  wise  man  and  a  Sopher 
(1  Chron.  xxvii.  .32).  The  Psalmist  praises  the 
stylus  of  a  ready  Sopher  (Ps.  xlv.  1  (2)).  The  ac 
tivitv  of  a  Sopher  is  everywhere  pacific  in  its  nature, 
demanding  sagacity,  and  presupposing  knowledge. 

The  stylus,   12??,  of  the  Psalmist,  is  the  same  as 

Deborah's  I22E?,  staff.  It  was  an  honor  to  Zebu- 
lun, that  in  the  tribe  there  were  able  Sopherim,  who 
could  make  the  art  which  commerce  had  caused  to 
flourish  among  them,  subserve  the  internal   and 

higher  life  of  Israel.  The  word  E'StjTS  suggests 
a  forcible  picture;  we  see  the  writer  artistically 
drawing  the  letters  with  his  stylus.  This  consti- 
tuted the  ancient  renown  of  the  tribe.  But  the 
victory  with  Deborah  at  the  Kishon,  will  not  less 
highly  exalt  those  who  had  a  part  in  it.  That 
thought  forms  the  transition  to  ver.  15.  Issachar. 
it  is  true,  had  not  shared  in  the  battle  ;  but  that 
did  not  diminish  the  significance  of  the  tribe. 
Their  territory  was  the  theatre  of  the  decision. 
Very  much  depended  upon  the  attitude  they  as- 
sumed. Were  the  battle  lost,  Is&achar  must  first 
bear  the  consequences.  Nevertheless,  their  chiefs 
decided  to  hearken  to  Deborah.  "  The  princes  in 
Issachar  were  with  Deborah."  They  surrounded 
Deborah,  while  Barak  plunged  into  the  valley.  As 
Moses  did  not  himself  take  the  field  against  Amalek, 
but  intrusted  Joshua  with  the  conduct  of  the  bat- 
tle while  he  prayed  on  the  mount,  so  Deborah 
stood  behind  the  battle-ranks,  surrounded  by  Issa- 
char, uttering  blessings,  or  in  case  discouragement 
showed  itself.4  urging,  encouraging,  inspiriting,  in  a 
manner  similar  perhaps  to  that  which  the  German 
women  were  wont  to  adopt.5  It  has  been  well  ob- 
the  combatants  by  their  zataqit  (singing).  Cf.  Wetzsrein 
Hauran.  145. 

5  This  was  still  done  by  the  women  of  the  crusaders  in 
the  battle  near  Dorylaum.  as  Petrus  Trudebod  informs  Ul 
(Gesta  Dei  pir  Francos,  p.  782):  "  FemitUE  nostra  in  ilia 
die  f iterant  notos  in  refugittm  ....  eon/ortantts  not 
fbniter  pugiumtes  a  vims  protigenies."    Cf.  WUken,  tiesck 

der  Kreuzz.,  i.  155. 


CHAPTER   V.    12-23. 


101 


lerved  that  in  the  expression   P"^3  ?-   "12ETB? V. 

the  word  ]3  is  not  the  particle,  but  the  noun. 
(Sehntirrerwas  the  first  to  adduce  this  from  among 
various  opinions  collected  together  in  the  com- 
mentary of  R.  Tanchum.)  1?  signifies  the  base, 
the  pedestal  (cf.  Ex.  xxx.  18);  and  in  truth 
Issachar  was  this  for  the  whole  battle.  It  was 
fought  on  his  territory,  an  1  his  men  formed  the 
reserve  of  Barak,  when  that  chieftain  threw  him- 
self into  the  valley.  ^313  nbt£7  p^r?  ex- 
presses the  storm-like  rapidity  of  Barak's  move- 
ment. The  Ptial  !"lvU?  is  to  be  taken  in  the  sense 
of  the  Greek  middle  voice.  — Presently  the  thought 
occurs  to  the  prophetess  that  still  other  neighbor- 
ing tribes  could  have  helped,  Reuben,  namely,  and 
Gilead,  beyond  the  Jordan,  Dan  at  its  sources, 
Asher  on  the  coast;  but  their  assistance  did  not 
come.  Deborah  does  not  blame  the  distant  tribes, 
as  Judah,  Simeon,  Ephraim,  Benjamin.  Gad.  but 
only  the  near  ones.  Reuben  at  that  time  cannot 
have  dwelt  to  the  east  of  the  Dead  Sea,  but  accord- 
ing to  Num.  xxxii.  26,  etc.,  must  have  had  a  more 
northerly  location,  reaching  as  far  up  as  the  banks 
of  the  Jabbok.1  There  he  must  have  dwelt,  pas- 
turing his  herds  by  his  brooks.  fYlBv  3,   plural  of 

11272,  like  ^/?,  brook,  stream  (cf.  my  exposi- 
tion of  Ps.  i.  Luther.  Zeitschr.,  1859,  p.  537).  Reu- 
ben, like  the  tribes  beyond  the  Jordan  generally, 
had  been  called  on  by  Barak  to  take  part  in  the 
war  against  Sisera.  In  like  manner  was  Sparta 
summoned  by  Athens,  before  Marathon.  And  like 
Sparta,  Reuben  considered  long.  Hence  the  de- 
risive description  of  the  men  of  Reuben  as   "'i'pn 

2?  and  2!?  v!?i?'7,  investigators  and  scrutinizers. 
They  reflect  upon  the  necessity  and  feasibility  of 
acting,  till  the  time  for  it  is  past.  Reuben  sits 
between  tbe  folds,  and  prefers  to  listen  to  the  shep- 
herd's flute,  c-ns  rnp-itp.    njrngj,   pipe, 

flute,  from  P~'t£.\  nibilare,  to  whistle,  to  hiss,  ac- 
cording to  the  root  and  form  of  the  name,  is  noth- 
ing else  than  the  syrinx,  pipe,  whose  invention 
Hellenic  mythology  ascribed  to  Pan.  What  is 
here  said  of  Reuben,  that  he  amuses  himself  with 

listening  to  the  herdsmen's  flutes  OTH?  is  properly 
the  herd),  is  the  same  that  Homer  says,  Iliad,  xviii. 
525  :   "  vofiries  repn6fi.evoi  ffvpiy^i." 

Ver.  17.  And  Gilead  tarries  beyond  Jordan. 
The  fact  that  what  is  here  said  of  Gilead  might  be 
equally  applied  to  Reuben,  i-itice  both  dwelt  beyond 
the  Jordan,  is  suggestive  of  the  excuse  which  Gil- 
ead may  have  urged  in  distinction  from  Reuben. 
Reuben  reflected  ;  but  Gilead  denied  that  the  efforts 
of  Barak  concerned  him :  did  he  not  live  beyond 
the  Jordan  ? 

But  Dan,  how  didst  thou  sail  in  ships !  - 
lewish  tradition  places  the  occurrence   related  in 

1  Only  those  tribes  can  have  been  censured  who  stood 
In  close  geographical  connection  with  Naphtali  and  Zebulun, 
not  those  whose  position  inclined  them  to  southern  alliances. 
Ephraim,'  Benjamin.  Judah.  and  Simeon,  receive  no  censure  ; 
but  Asher,  Dan.  and  Gilead,  do.  How  could  Reuben  be 
blamed,  while  Judah  was  not,  if  his  seat  were  below  at  the 
Dead  Sea? 


2  iHVJN,   used  only  of  sea-going  vessels,  cf.  Prov  xxx. 
8  [But    C"!™"'^  assuredly  means   height,   an   elevation 


19 


ch.  xviii.  before  the  time  of  Deborah.  And  to  all 
appearance  this  seems  to  be  the  right  view.  For 
in  its  southern  possessions  the  tribe  of  Dan  did  no 
hold  the  sea-coast  (Judg.  i.  34).  Moreover,  how 
should  Deborah  complain  of  the  want  of  assistance 
from  southern  Dan,  when  she  entered  no  such 
complaint  against  Judah  !  If,  however.  Dan  had 
already  removed  to  the  vicinity  of  Naphtali,  the 
complaint  was  very  natuial.  The  old  expositors 
explain  that  "  Dan  had  shipped  his  goods  ana 
chattels  in  order  to  cross  the  Jordan."  But  this  is 
less  simple  than  the  supposition  that  Dan,  like 
Zebulun,  was  engaged  with  the  Phoenicians  (Tyre) 
in  maritime  commerce,  or  at  least  pretended  to  be, 
as  a  reason  for  refusing  Barak's  summons.  What 
renders  this  interpretation  the  more  probable,  is 
the  fact  that  Deborah  speaks  next  of  Asher,  "  who 
dwells  on  the  sea-shore."  Jabin,  king  of  Hazor, 
cannot  have  domineered  over  the  coast,  where  the 
powerful  maritime  cities  were  in  the  ascendency. 
Therefore  Asher  also  had  nothing  to  suffer  from 
him.  He  dwells  securely  in  his  harbors.  It  is 
noteworthy  that  what  the  singer  here  says  of 
Asher,    the   blessing  of  Jacob   says  in   the  same 

words  of  Zebulun,  12^  C&l  ^inb,  with  an 
additional  clause,  however,  concerning  the  pursuit 
of  navigation. 

Ver.  18.  This  verse  puts  it  beyond  all  doubt 
that  only  Zebulun  and  Naphtali  engaged  actively 
in  the  conflict ;  for  only  to  them  refers  the  declara- 
tion that  they  "  hazarded  their  souls  unto  death." 
(For  the  sake  of  the  poetical  parallelism  Naphtali 
is  put  at  the  head  of  the  second  member,  instead  of 
making  "  Zebulun  and  Naphtali "  the  composite 
subject  of  the  whole  distich.)  Their  faith  in  Deb- 
orah's word  was  so  firm,  that  they  dared  risk  the 
unequal  conflict  even  in  the  Dalle)/  ("  the  high-plain 
of  the  field").  Therein  consisted  the  uncommon 
sacrifice  of  these  tribes.  Hitherto.  Israel  had 
always  given  up  the  valleys  (cf.  Judg.  i.  19,  34), 
because  it  could  not  overcome  disciplined  armies 
and  chariots.  Even  down  to  the  time  of  the  latei 
kings,  it  was  considered  invincible  on  the  moun- 
tains (1  Kgs.  xx.  2.3),  which  fact  however  implies 
that  in  the  valleys  it  still  continued  to  be  other- 
wise. Hence,  ■"'"TCE'  *!31~73  is  to  be  understood, 
not  of  the  "  heights,"  but  of  the  surface,  of  the 
field.3  It  was  a  fearful  battle-crisis  :  a  few  against 
so  many,  a  band  of  footmen  against  a  host  of  iron 
chariots,  a  handful  of  mountaineers  on  the  plain, 
a  few  tribal  chieftains  against  the  mighty. 

Ver.  19.  Kings  came.  This  is  to  be  under- 
stood figuratively,  of  eminent  and  powerful  mili- 
tary leaders  :  Sisera  was  no  king.4    S;  H-??  ^V? 

•T^?,  gain  of  money  they  obtained  not.  This  is 
usually  understood  only  of  the  booty,  which  the 
enemy  hoped  to  obtain,  but  failed  to  get.  But  the 
troops  of  Zebulun  and  Naphtali  can  scarcely  have 
appeared  to  promise  a  booty  rich  in  money.  It  is 
therefore  probable  that  the  meaning  of  the  proph- 

above  the  general  level,  not  surface.  In  connection  with 
the  facts  of  tbe  history,  the  expression,  it  seems  to  me,  can 
only  mean  either  Mount  Tabor  or  the  higher  parts  of  the 
plain  of  Esdraelon,  as  the  gathering-place  of  th*  warriors, 
where  they  in  thought  and  intention  ''  scorned  their  lives.7* 
So  Bachmann  and  many  other  expositors.  —  Tr.] 

4  [On  Taanach  and  Megiddo  see  at  ch.  i.  27.  The 
'F  waters  of  Megiddo  "  undoubtedly  refers  to  the  Kishon 
The  Kishon  valley  was  in  like  manner  tailed  the  Valley  of 
Megiddc,  2  Chron.  xxxv.  22  ;  Zech.  xii  11.  Cf.  RoV  BM 
Rts.,  u.  330.  —  Tb_] 


102 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


etess  includes  something  else.  We  know  from 
instances  of  later  times,  that  when  the  people  did 
not  feel  themselves  strong  enough  to  cope  with  a 
threatening  enemy,  they  sought  to  buy  him  off  with 
money.  Thus,  in  the  reign  of  Rehoboam,  Shishuk, 
king  of  Egvpt,  took  away-  all  the  treasures  of  the 
temple  (1  Kgs.  xiy.  26).  "Asa  gave  all  the  remain- 
ing gold  and  silver  to  Benhadad  of  Damascus 
(I  Ivg's.  xv.  IS).  Menahem  collected  a  large  amount 
of  money  in  order  to  persuade  the  king  of  Assyria 
to  turn" back  (2  Kgs.  xv.  20).  Sisera  was  not 
so  successful.  He  neither  obtained  composition- 
money  before  the  campaign,  nor  did  he  secure  any 
booty"  after  it.  The  troops  and  their  leaders  who 
had  accompanied  him,  gained  no  profit  from  this 

expedition.  Profit  is  the  prominent  idea  in  3?~3  : 
hence  the  Chaldee  Paraphrast  usually  puts  "  Mam- 
mon "  for  it. 

Vers.  20-22.  From  heaven  fought  the  stars. 
Josephus  has  introduced  into  his  narrative  of  this 
victory,  the  description  of  a  thunder-storm,  accom- 
panied by  wind  and  hail,  by  which  the  enemy  were 
thrown  into  confusion.  It  is  one  of  those  prag- 
matical endeavors  by  which  he  seeks  to  facilitate 
belief  for  his  Hellenic  readers,  and  to  make  the 
miraculous  more  natural.  The  occasion  for  it  was 
given  by  the  expression,  ch.  iv.  15,  "and  God  con- 
founded them."  The  presence  and  effect  of  thun- 
der and  hail  were  inferred,  by  comparison,  from 
two  other  passages,  where  a  similar  divinely- 
wrought  confusion  of  the  enemy  is  related.  Thus 
in  Josh.  x.  10,  11,  when  Joshua  fights  against  the 
enemy,  it  is  said :  "  And  the  Lord  confounded 
them,  and  as  they  fled  cast  down  great  hailstones 
upon  them,  that  they  died."  So  also  1  Sam.  vii. 
10 :  "  And  the  Lord  thundered  with  a  great  thun- 
der on  that  day,  and  confounded  the  Philistines." 
But  there  appears  to  be  no  necessity  whatever  for 
transferring  these  occurrences  into  our  pas^iLM1. 
The  narrator  is  rather  thinking  of  Ex.  xiv.  24. 
which  speaks  of  Pharaoh's  confusion  by  ( iod  with- 
out thunder  and  hail.  Nor  is  there  any  need  of 
thunder  and  hail  to  confound  an  army.  The  eon- 
fusion  of  Rosbach  (Nov.  5,  1757)  was  not  caused 
by  the  intervention  of  a  storm.  All  that  appears 
from  the  statements  of  ch.  iv.  and  the  Song  of 
Deborah  alone,  is,  that  Barak  and  his  faithful  fol- 
lowers made  a  violent  and  sudden  attack,  before 
the  numerous  chariots  had  been  placed  in  battle- 
array.  This  was  done  as  night  was  coming  on. 
When  Joshua  fought,  sun  and  moon  assisted  him 
(Josh.  x.  12) :  on  Barak,  the  stars  shone  brightly, 
—  which  does  not  make  a  thunder-storm  probable. 
Consistently  with  Israelitish  conceptions,  the  help 
of  the  stars  can  only  be  understood  of  their  shin- 
ing.1    Joshua  also  had  come  upon   his  enemies 

1  [Bertheau  takes  the  words  "  the  stars  fought,"  as  fig- 
urative language,  expressive  of  divine  assistance.  'f  From 
the  decisive  victory  it  is  certain  that  God  was  with  Israel 
and  fought  in  the  midst  of  them,  ver.  13  [read  according  to 
the  Masoretic  text  division] ;  that  He  himself  threw  the 
hostile  host  into  confusion,  ch  iv.  15  ;  and  that  the  strong 
arm  of  a  higher  Power  directed  the  course  of  the  battle. 
All  this  ia  clearly  and  vividly  present  to  the  mind  of  the 
Singer.  Filled  with  the  thoughts  of  God's  wonderful  aid, 
and  venturing  under  the  impulses  of  a  bold  enthusiasm  to 
give  definite  representation  of  his  distinctly  recognized  yet 
mysterious  work  on  earth  and  in  the  midst  of  men,  it  is  to 
her  as  if  the  heavens,  the  eternal  dwelling-place  of  the  holy 
God,  had  bowed  themselves  down  to  earth,  or  —  to  use  the 
language  of  the  text  —  as  if  the  stars,  forsaking  their  usual 
orbits,  had  fought  against  Sisera.  Quite  similar  is  the 
Imagery  in  I's  xviii."  The  same  view  is  adopted  by  Bach- 
mann  and  many  others.  — Ta.] 


suddenly  (CSH2,  Josh.  x.  9).  Gideon,  too,  thre* 
himself  upon  the  hostile  camp  in  the  night.  But 
not  the  stars  alone  assisted  Barak  in  his  heroic 
course.  As  the  enemy,  either  for  attack  or  in 
flight,  wished  to  cross  the  Kishon,  in  the  direction 
from  Taanach  and  Megiddo,  the  swollen  stream 
swept   many   of   them   into   the   arms   of  death. 

"  The  brook  Kishon  snatched  (^2"J?)  them  away." 

(H~!2>  in  its  Semitic  forms,  corresponds  to  the 
Indo-Germanic  forms  rapere,  Ger.  raffen,  Sanskrit, 
rup.)       It  thus  came  to  the  help  of  Israel,  and 

became  a  C^Q^lp  7PI3,  brook  of  succors.  In 
whs  sense  the  Kishon  should  be  especially  called 
a    brook   of   "  ancient   days,"    as   many   explain 

0,S3:nf7i  cannot  be  made  out,  not  at  least  from 
Scripture.'2  The  rendering  "  brook  of  battles,"  has 
little  ground  in  philology.  The  repetition  of 
"  brook  Kishon,"  is  doubtless  intended  to  suggest 
a  definition  of  what  sort  of  a  stream  the  Kishon 
was  for  Israel  on  that  day.  It  was  not  merely  the 
scene  of  battle,  but  an  instrument  of  help  against 

the  foe.     O^Ji?  has  frequently  this  sense,  especially 

in  poetical  language.  In  Ps.  lxxix.  8  the  poet 
prays,  "  Let  thy  mercy  come  speedily  to  our  help  " 

(W^r?1:) ;  cf.  Ps.  lix.  1 1 ;  xxi.  4.  But  in  Deu- 
teronomy, also,  ch.  xxiii.  5,  it  is  said  of  Amnion 
and  Moab  that  they  did  not  help  Israel  with  bread 

and  water  (OOO^  ^O^p'fcO).     Kedumim   is  the 

plural  of  aform  Q^liJ-  TheKishon  —  thusexults 
the  poet  —  showed  itself  a  helpful  stream.  The 
statement  that  it  snatched  the  enemies  away,  pre- 
supposes its  swollen  condition.  It  is  only  after  the 
rainy  season  that  the  Kishon  runs  full ;  for  which 
reason  the  LXX.  call  it  x«'M<W<><«.  winter-flowing. 
In  summer  it  is  for  the  most  part  dried  up ;  but  in 
the  spring  it  sends  down  a  rushing  flood.  Ritter 
(xvi.  704,  Gage's  Transl.  iv.  351)  adduces  the  fact 
that  on  the  i6th  of  April,  1799,  in  a  conflict  be- 
tween the  French  and  Turks,  many  of  the  latter 
perished  in  its  raging  waters.  Hence  we  may  infer 
that  the  time  of  Barak's  battle  is  to  be  fixed  in  the 
latter  part  of  April  or  the  beginning  of  May.  The 
Feast  of  Weeks  fell  in  the  same  season.8  Immedi- 
ately after  the  narrative  in  Exodus,  it  is  intimated 
that  the  manifestation  on  Sinai  occurred  in  the 
beginning  of  the  third  month,  and  consequently 
coincided  with  the  Feast  of  Weeks.  The  occur- 
rence of  the  battle  in  a  season  devoted  to  such 
commemorations,  explains  with  peculiar  emphasis 
the  opening  lines  of  the  Song,  concerning  the  om- 
nipotence of  God  on  Sinai,  "  vy^ien  the  earth  trem- 

a  [Bachmann,  who  adopts  this  interpretation,  explains  it 
from  the  fact  "  that  the  ancient  wonder  of  the  Red  Sea 
appears  to  repeat  itself  at  the  Kishon.  As  in  the  whole  of 
the  present  wonderful  deliverance  Deborah  beholds  a  re- 
newal of  the  glorious  occurrences  at  Sinai  (ver.  4),  so  she 
finds  in  the  experience  of  Sisera 's  army  at  the  Kishon  a 
renewal  of  that  which  befell  the  Egyptians  at  the  Red  Sea  ; 
and  thus  the  Kishon  in  her  view  takes  the  place  of  the  Red 
Sea  which  that  ancient  wonder  had  rendered  famous." 
Far  fetched  ;  although  suggested  by  several  earlier  Rabbini- 
cal and  ecclesiastical  expositors.  —  Ta.] 

8  A  Jewish  hymn  of  the  Middle  Ages,  by  R.  Mair,  still 
sung  in  the  synagogues,  at  the  Passover  (LW  Shemurbn), 
transports  the  battle  into  the  Passover  night  ;  for  which, 
however,  it  has  no  chronological  grounds,  but  only  the  the- 
ological principle  that  all  achievements  of  freedom  wen 
accomplished  in  that  night. 


CHAPTER    V.   24-31. 


103 


tied."  The  ancients  had  a  not  ungrounded  tradi 
tion,  —  to  prove  which  this  is  not  the  place,  — for 
regarding  the  Ixviiith  Psalm  as  a  song  for  the  Feast 
3f  Weeks ;  and  it  is  just  that  psalm  which  incor- 
porated into  itself  the  introductory  parts  of  Debo- 
rah's Song. 

While  singing,  the  prophetess  sees  herself  trans- 
ported into  the  tumult  of  the  battle.  The  stream 
rushes  violently  onward,  —  the  perishing  foes  con- 
tend with  its  whirling  eddies.  The  roar  of  the 
conflict,  its  battle-cries,  and  shouts  of  victory,  are 
around  her.  In  the  midst  of  her  Song,  she  ad- 
dresses her  own  soul,  as  the  Greeks  addressed  their 
muse,  with  words  of  animation  and  refreshment  : 
Tread  vigorously  on,  my  soul !  Her  genius  hovers 
over  the  valley  of  conflict ;  her  ear  feels  the  hoof- 
strokes  of  the  flying  foes,  who,  panic  stricken  before 
Israel,  furiously  dash  off  into  flight.  What  a  tri- 
umph !  the  "  strong  ones  "  (C',"1,2S)  run  away  ! 
^n^T  is  to  run  fast,  used  of  a  horse's  trot,  like  the 

Sanskrit  dru,  Greek  Spavat  (SidpouTKw).  Q"'~]',3^, 
as  Bochart  already  remarked  (Hieroz.  i.  99),  is 
probably  used  here,  as  in  Jer.  viii.  16  ;  xlvii.  3,  of 
(he  war-horses,  who  with  their  rattling  chariots 
ran  wildly  off.  In  that  case,  the  might  of  the 
steeds  stands  representatively  for  that  of  the  war- 
riors themselves. 

Ver.  23.  The  flying  enemy  had  not  succeeded 
even  in  escaping,  if  all  places  of  the  surrounding 
country  had  done  their  duty.  The  prophetess 
utters  sentence  of  condemnation  against  the  inhab- 
itants of  Meroz,  because  they  rendered  no  assist- 
ance. Their  aid  had  probably  been  important  in 
the  pursuit.  Hence,  their  conduct  is  referred  to 
here,  —  before  the  blessing  upon  Jael.     The  verse 

1  It  is  altogether  erroneous  to  take  0^11^2^  here  of 
the  heroes  of  Israel.  For  just  therein  consisted  the  faith- 
lessness of  the  inhabitants  of  Meroz,  that  though  Israel  was 
threatened  by  heroes  and  mighty  men,  they  offered  no 
uriit&nce. 


first  introduces  a  messenger  of  God,  crying  "  Curse 
ye  Meroz,  curse  it ! "  and  then  continues  itself 
"  Cursed  are  its  inhabitants."  The  "  messenger 
of  God  "  is  the  singer  herself,  sent  by  the  Spirit  of 
God  to  consummate  the  victorious  achievement 
In  obedience  to  the  Spirit's  prompting,  she  with 
Barak  pronounces  the  national  ban  against  the 
faithless  city.     For  it  came   not  to    the  help   of 

God    (njn*  H"^1?),  that  is,  to  the  help  of  the 

njn^  CV,  the  People  of  God,  as  in  vers.  11   and 

13.  It  left  the  cause  and  the  good  gifts  of  God  to 
their  fate,  when  they  were  endangered  in  battle 
against  heroes.1  The  greater  the  responsibility, 
the  severer  the  punishment.  The  higher  the  cause 
to  be  served,  the  blacker  the  treason  that  abandons 
it.  To  ascertain,  at  this  date,  the  site  of  Meroz 
can  hardly  be  possible.  It  has  indeed  been  sup- 
posed to  be  identical  with  a  place  on  Robinson's, 
map,  southwest  of  Endor,2  called  Kefr  Musr  (cf. 
Ritter,  xv.  399  [Gage's  Trans],  ii.  316])  ;  but  nei- 
ther the  name  of  the  place  is  certain,  nor  its  situa 
tion  entirely  suitable;  and,  finally, considering  the 
popnlar  odium  which  the  Song  of  Deborah  affixed 
to  the  name,  it  is  by  no  means  probable  that  it  re- 
mained unchanged,  and  actually  perpetuated  itself. 
Procopius  confirms  this  surmise,  when  he  observes 
(Reland,  Palttstina,  p.  896),  that  concerning  the 
name  he  had  found  nothing  anywhere,  not  even  in 
Hebrew  expositions.  The  curse  itself  most  proba- 
bly implied,  as  in  Josh,  vi.,  the  utter  destruction  of 
the  place,  although  nothing  further  is  said  of  it. 
In  later  times,  this  verse  became  a  locus  classicus 
for  the  Talmudic  exposition  of  the  ban  against 
persons  and  things  {Mono1  Katan,  16,  a  ;  Shebnoth, 
36,  a;  Selden,  dr.  Synedriis,  p.  84,  etc.). 

2  The  battle  took  place  south  of  £ndor.  That  Barak  in 
his  swift  descent  from  the  heights  met  the  enemy  there  first, 
appears  from  the  remarkable  statement  of  Ps.  lxxxiii.  10 
which  speaks  of  Endor  as  a  point  of  the  battle-field. 


THB  FATE   OF   THE  BNXMT. 

Vers.  24-31. 


ii  Blessed  among  women  be  Jael, 
The  wife  of  Heber,  the  Kenite, 
Blessed  among  women  of  the  tents ! 

25  He  asks  for  water,  she  gives  him  milk, 

In  a  beautiful  bowl  she  carries  him  cream. 

26  With  her  left  she  takes  the  nail,1 
With  her  right  the  heavy  hammer, 
Swings  it  over  Sisera,  smites  his  head, 
Crashes  through,  and  transpierces  his  temples.9 

27  At  her  feet  he  curls  himself  and  falls. 

At  her  feet  he  lies,  curls  himself  again,  and  falls, 
And  as  he  curls  himself  again,  falls  —  dead  ! 8 

28  Through  the  window  she  looks,  at  the  lattice  laments  the  mother  of  Sisera : 
Why  lingers  his  car  so  long, 

Why  stay  the  steps  of  his  chariots  ? 


104  THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


29  Wise  ladies  answer  her,* 

Herself  also  refutes  her  own  words : 

30  Will  they  not  find  booty  and  divide  it  ? 
Two  maidens  for  each  man ; 

Booty  of  purple  robes  for  Sisera, 

Yea,  booty  of  purple  robes  ! 

Color-embroidered  vestments,  two  for  each  neck  of  the  captured  1  • 

31  So  may  all  thy  foes  fall,  O  God, 

But  those  who  love  thee  rise  as  the  sun  in  his  strength ! 

And  the  land  rested  forty  years. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

p.  Ver.  26-  —  The  rendering  of  m^  by  tf  her  left  hand,"  —  if  admissible  at  all,  —  must  be  justified  by  the  assumption 

of  an  intended  contrast  with  HT^^  in  the  next  line.     The  form  POn  /tETl,  according  to  Gesenius,  Gram.  47, 3,  3 

Is  an  improper  use  of  the  3d  plural  for  the  3d  singular ;  according  to  Green,  88,  p.  119,  it  stands  for  PTSn^tTj7! 

"her  hand,  she  puts  it  forth  ;  "  according  to  Ewald,  191  c,  it  is  simply  the  3d  fem.  sg.   HT'tpi7),  with   an  additional 

feminine  characteristic   (("73)   in  order  to  distinguish  it  from  the  3d  masc.  singular.     Ewald's  view  is  also  adopted  by 
Bertheau,  Keil,  and  (in  the  main,  by)  Bachmann,  and  is  probably  the  true  one.  —  Tr.] 
[2  Ver.  26.  —  Dr.  Cassel's  rendering  of  the  last  two  lines  of  this  verse  is  as  follows  :  — 

Schwingt  ihn  auf  Sisra,  schldgt  ihn  an^s  Haupt, 
Schmettert  nach  und  durchhohrt  thin  die  Schl&fe. 

We  have  endeavored  to  reproduce  his  alliteration  as  nearly  as  possible,  but  have  nevertheless  lost  the  paranomaaia  of 
J"1D  'H  with  n*1^2^n,  hammer,  in  the  preceding  line,  for  which  our  author  has  Schldgel,  mallet,  beetle.  The  awful 
energy  of  the  lines,  and  their  onomatopoetic  character,  may  be  distantly  and  somewhat  inelegantly  imitated  in  English, 
thus  — 

"  She  hammers  Sisera,  mashes  his  head, 
Smashes  (him),  and  crashes  through  his  temples.*'  —  Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  27.  —  The  above  translation  of  this  verse  disregards  the  Masoretic  text-division  (according  to  which  2Dtt?, 
"  he  lies,"  belongs  to  the  first  line),  and  takes   ""IT  S3   in  a  temporal  instead  of  local  sense.     The  radical  meaning  of 

j?~^3  is  probably  "  to  bend  or  contract  one's  self  "  (cf.  Ges.  Lex.,  Keil,  Bachmann),  the  usual  sense  "  to  kneel '"  being 
derivative.  The  mortally  wounded  Sisera,  pinned  to  the  ground  (ch.  iv.  21),  involuntarily  curls  himself  together,  as  Dr. 
Cassel  says  —  i.  e.  brings  his  knees  forward  and  upward.  But  Dr.  Cass**rs  idea  that  this  involuntary  muscular  contrac- 
tion was  repeated  three  times  is  inconsistent  with  the  proper  local  sense  of  "ItCHS,  and  with  the  repeated  ?3. 
Dr.  Cassel,  it  is  true,  seeks  to  avoid  the  latter  difficulty  by  supposing  (see  the  com.  below)  that  Sisera  rt  seeks  to  rise,  aud 
falls  back  ;  "  but  how  could  he  rise  so  as  to  fall  back  when  his  head  was  pinned  to  the  ground  ?  It  is  altogether  more 
likely  that  in  this  song  of  victory,  V— 3  is  used  as  in  military  language  (and  perhaps  not  without  a  touch  of  con- 
temptuous irony),  for  "  to  die,"  (t  to  be  slain,"  in  this  sense,  ■  £3,  like  ir«TT«iVj  cadere,  and  our  "  fall,"  is  frequently 
used,  cf  the  Lexica.  The  repetition  of  the  idea  of  the  first  line  in  the  second  and  third  springs  from  the  great  interest 
of  the  singer  in  the  destruction  of  the  much-dreaded  chieftain,  and  serves  to  intensify  the  impression  to  be  produced  on 
those  who  hear  her.     Accordingly,  we  would  render  : — 

At  her  feet  he  curls  himself,  he  falls,  he  lies. 

At  her  feet  he  curls  himself,  he  falls  ! 

Where  he  curls  himself,  there  he  falls  —  destroyed. 

So  also  Bertheau,  Keil,  Bachmann.  For  ]^3,  in  the  sense  of  "at  "  cf.  remarks  of  Hengstenberg  on  Zech.  xiii.  6,  in 
Christ ol.  iv.  106,  Edinb.  edition.  —  Tr.] 

[4  Ver.  29. — The  above  translation  neglects   both  the   suffix  in   i""Pj""n "")££.'',    and  the  construct  state  of     "11     pIH 

(fem.  of    02n).      In    7132^7  i^l     Dr.  Cassel  apparently  finds   the  3d  fem.  siug.  imperf.  with   the  suffix  of  the  3d  fem 

Bing.     But  as  the  subject  is  plural,  it  is  better  to  take  nSD^i^l    as  standing  for   n^^DVj-l.     The  accented  e  in   the 

latter  form  seeks  to  strengthen  itself  by  doubling  the  following  consonant,  in  which  case  the  ^  naturally  Cilia  away, 
although  it  may  also  remain,  as  in  Mic.  vii.  10.  Cf.  Ewald,  Gram.  17  c.  The  true  rendering  of  the  second  line  of  this 
verse  is  much  disputed.  According  to  Keil  the  sense  of  the  line  is  :  "  Sisera's  mother,  however,  does  not  allow  herself 
to  be  quieted  by  the  speeches  of  her  wise  ladies,  but  repeats  the  anxious  question,  Why  does  Sisera  delay  to  tome  ?  " 
le  and  Bachmann  translate  the  verse  thus  :  — 

f(  The  wise  ones  of  her  princesses  answer: 
—  But  she  repeats  to  herself  her  words — ".  —  Tr.] 

[6  Ver.  30.  —  On  our  author's  text-division  in  this  verse,  see  the  Commentary  below.  Bachmann,  who  ad'ierwi  to  Um 
Masoretic  punctuation,  translates  as  follows:  — 


CHAPTER    V.    24-31. 


105 


"  Will  they  not  find,  divide  booty  ? 
A  maiden,  two  maidens  for  the  head  of  a  man, 
Booty  of  colored  garments  for  Sisera. 
Booty  of  colored  garments,  (of)  variegated  work, 
A  colored  garment,  two  variegated  for  the  neck  of  the  booty.'' Tm.] 


KXEQBTICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

The  closing  part  of  Deborah's  Song  has  justly 
been  regarded  as  a  specimen  of  poetical  representa- 
tion that  cannot  be  surpassed.  In  it  the  singer 
shows  that  she  is  a  woman.  The  triumph  with 
which  Jael's  deed  is  praised  and  Sisera's  mother 
mocked,  evinces  an  almost  passionate  mental  exal- 
tation. The  picture  of  Sisera's  death  is  drawn 
with  startling  vividness.  On  the  back  ground 
of  a  divine  enthusiasm,  there  rises  an  ecstatic 
delight  in  the  deed  of  one  woman,  and  in  the 
misery  of  another,  such  as  springs  up  in  none 
but  a  woman's  heart.  That  which  in  heathen 
female  characters  becomes  demoniac  in  its  nature, 
is  in  Deborah  purified  by  the  divine  thoughts 
which  animate  her.  >.'o  subjective  interest,  no  pri- 
vate feeling,  no  personal  passion,  influences  her  ; 
the  highest  interests  of  her  God  and  people  rill  her 
soul.  It  is  not  her  triumph,  but  that  of  her  ever- 
living  Maker,  that  she  celebrates;  and  yet  at  the 
height  of  its  exultation  her  Song  breaks  out  in  a 
mood  by  which  the  woman  might  be  recognized, 
even  if  neither  name  nor  other  information  on  the 
authorship  had  been  handed  down  to  us.  That 
which  especially  gives  to  the  conclusion  of  the 
Song  its  great  value  and  attractiveness,  is  the  fact 
that  from  it  the  geunineness  of  the  whole  becomes 
even  more  psychologically  than  grammatically 
evident — that  the  mantic  power  of  a  prophetic 
woman,  unweakened  and  in  the  full  glow  of  its 
burning  ecstasy,  is  nowhere  else  filled  and  con- 
trolled as  it  is  here,  by  rational  enthusiasm  born 
of  an  objective,  divinely-given  truth.  How  well  it 
was  said  of  her,  that  she  was  a  "  woman  of  a  fiery 
spirit''  (ch.  iv.  4),  becomes  here  most  manifest. 
The  more  terrible  the  tyranny,  the  more  common- 
place the  enemy,  the  more  intensely  burns  her  soul 
in  her  song  of  victory.  The  glowing  heat  of  her 
prophetic  enthusiasm  shines  through  the  irony, 
with  which  she  places  the  vain  pride  of  unbelieving 
enemies  over  against  the  almighty  power  of  God. 
It  is  not  an  irony  of  hatred,  disfiguring  the  face 
with  scornful  smiles,  but  such  as  springs  from  the 
consciousness  that  God's  wisdom  and  power  are 
superior  to  all  heroes  and  heathen.  Verse  'J.'!,  pro- 
nouncing the  ban  against  Meroz,  says,  "  thus  pro- 
claims the  messenger  of  God."  The  name  of  God 
is  the  source  of  all  power  and  authority.  Apos- 
tasy from  God  incurs  the  ban ;  whoever  helps  to 
advance  his  works,  is  blessed. 

Vers.  24,  25.  Blessed  among  women  be  Jael. 
Meroz  did  not  come  to  (lie  help  of  the  people  of 
God.  Jael  came,  though  a  woman  ;  and  not  of 
Israel,  but  a  dweller  in  tents.  The  name  of  her  hus- 
band is  mentioned  to  distinguish  her  from  others 
of  the  same  name,  and  also  to  give  him  an  inter- 
est in  the  fame  of  his  wife.  Accordingly,  for  her 
sake,  he  also  has  obtained  a  place  in  the  records 
of  history.  The  blessing  which  she  enjoys  before 
ill  women  "  in  the  tent,"  ;'.  e.  before  all  who  like 
Herself  and  the  Kenites  wandered  about  in  tents, 
ifter  the  manner  of  nomads,  she  did  not  win  by 
accident.  She  made  an  energetic  use  of  her  oppor- 
tunity.     She   deceives   the  flying  Sisera   by  the 

1  [When  soured.  See  Winer's  Htatwiirlerbuch,  i.  648. 
-IE.] 


signs  of  homage  which  she  presents  to  him.  He 
asks  only  for  water;  she  offers  him  milk,  and,  as 

was  befitting  with  such  a  guest,  D'HV;TN  -?~2, 
in  a  bowl  such  as  princes  use.  She  takes  the 
handsome  show-bowl,  not  used  on  ordinary  occa- 
sions, and  hands  him  HSQn.  This  word,  which 
also  signifies  butter,  expresses  in  general  the  more 
solid  forms  of  milk.  Here,  where  it  stands  par- 
allel with  2  vll,  it  signifies,  in  harmony  with  the 
"  show-bowl,"  the  best  milk,  the  cream.  There  is 
absolutely  nothing  to  suggest  the  opinion  of  older 
expositors  (Schnurrer,  p.  83,  received  by  Herder 
also)  that  she  wished  to  intoxicate  him  "with  the 
milk.  Moreover,  we  need  not  assume  that  the 
milk  was  camel-milk;  and,  at  all  events,  the  intox- 
icating property  of  that  milk  '  must  have  been 
known  to  Sisera.  Before  Bochart  (cf.  Serarius,  p. 
145),  Junius  and  Tremellius  had  already  ex- 
pressed the  opinion,  approved  by  Scaliger,  that  in 

'9P  the  Latin  simpulum  reappears.  But  saph, 
sephfl,  are  Hebrew  forms  of  a  widely-diffused  term 
tor  round,  scooped-out  vessels,  whether  of  larger  or 
smaller  size,  and  may  be  recognized  in  the  Greek 
(TKa<pr),  bowl,  trough,  tub,  Latin  scaphium,  and  in 
the  German  Schaff  ( tub,  pail),  Scheffel  (moditis),  a 
round  measure).2  It  is  true,  however,  that  sephel 
continued  to  be  used  among  the  Jews  (in  the  Tal- 
mud) and  Syrians,  and  that  the  shape  of  the  vessel 
may  be  most  nearly  expressed  by  simpulum,  whichj 
as  Cicero's  proverb,  "jtuchis  in  simpxdo  "  —  a  tem- 
pest in  a  nutshell  —  proves,  was  a  smaller  drink- 
lng-vessel. 

Vers.  26,  27.  The  first  of  these  verses  shows 
that  the  narrator  in  ch.  iv.  was  in  possession  of 
traditional  information  beside  that  furnished  by 
this  Song.  The  prophetess  passes  over  interme- 
diate, self-evident  matters.  Sisera,  of  course,  must 
lie  down  and  sleep,  before  a  woman  can  approaeli 
his  head  with  hammer  and  nail.  The  verse  de- 
picts the  dreadful  work  and  vigor  of  Jael,  as  she 
approaches  and  drives  the  nail  into  Sisera's  head. 

The  terms  employed  (VC"?t  PO£.  E^n)  are 
such  as  cause  us  to  hear  the  blows  of  the  hammer, 
sounding  repeatedly,  till  she  finishes  her  work 
What  a  terrible  picture  !  Before  the  warrior  stands 
the  kindled  woman  —  the  heavy  hammer  (as  Her- 
der finely  translated  D^bspy  iTlsbn,  for  b"2V 
is  one  who  works  hard  or  heavily,  a  toiler)  in  her 
right  hand.  The  smitten  chieftain  draws  himself 
together,  he  seeks  to  rise,  and  falls  back.  Twice 
more  he  writhes  convulsively,  and  dies.  There  he 
lies,  the  haughty  warrior  who  thought  to  destroj- 
the  People  of  God  —  slain  by  a  woman  in  disgrace- 
ful flight,  tar  from  his  kindred,  alone  and  unla- 
mented,  an  example  to  conquerors  of  human  weak- 
ness and  divine  power.  ("PTTIT  is  the  condition  ol 
utter  lifelessness,  when  every  sound  and  motion 
has  ceased;  hence  it  stands  in  contrast  with  5"3?i 
which  describes  the  wounded  man  instinctively  bend- 
ingand  drawing  himself  together,  as  if  about  to  rise.) 

2  Of  two  hollow  measures,  still  in  use  in  Damascus,  th« 
one  is  called  mudd1  the  other  sittnbul. 


106 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


Vers.  28-31.  But  the  fall  of  Sisera  in  the  tent 
af  a  woman  does  not  complete  the  picture  of  the 
extraordinary  triumph.  The  prophetess  shows 
yet  another  view.  She  carries  her  hearers  to  a 
distant  scene.  While  Sisera  lies  here  in  ignomin- 
ious death,  what  takes  [dace  in  the  palace  of  his 
capital  ?  The  return  of  the  chieftain,  accustomed 
to  victory,  has  already  been  long  expected.  His 
mother  stands  at  the  window  above,1  in  the  airy 
upper  room.  Her  view  commands  the  road  to  a 
great  distance.  She  peers  and  listens  ;  but  still 
the  rolling  of  the  victorious  chariots  is  not  heard. 
No  triumphal  procession,  with  Sisera  at  its  head, 
gorgeously  attired  and  proud  of  victory,  lights  up 
the  horizon.  A  sad  presentiment  steals  over  her 
heart :  Why  does  his  chariot  delay  ?  she  cries, 
wailingly  ;  a  why  does  he  tarry  so  long  ?  Is  there 
no  car3  coming,  to  bring  tidings  at  least?  —  Who 
should  first  suffer  anxiety,  if  not  a  mother  f  Of  a 
wife,  nothing  is  said ;  such  love  thrives  not  in  the 
harem  of  a  prince.  He  is  his  mother's  pride,  the 
great  hero,  who  had  hitherto  been  invincible. 
What  she  has  in  him,  and  what  she  loses,  con- 
cerns no  other  woman.  With  this  pride,  her 
women,  noble  ladies,  whom  her  high  rank  as 
mother  of  the  all-powerful  commander  draws 
around  her,  comfort  her.  Victory,  they  say,  has 
also  its  occupations.  If  he  has  not  come  yet,  it  is 
because  these  detain  him.  No  other  explanation 
of  his  non-arrival  is  possible.  Anxiety,  therefore, 
Is  improper.  For  it  is  precisely  victory  that  delays 
him.  This  is  what  her  women  say  to  her  ;  the 
nattered  mother  admits  the  justness  of  their  obser- 
vations, and  with  them  confutes  her  own  forebod- 
ing questions.4  The  prophetess,  with  delicate 
irony,  calls  the  women  who  thus  counsel,  "wise 
ones."  It  is  the  wisdom  of  a  pride  that  deems  it 
inconceivable  that  Sisera  should  not  have  been 
victorious  ;  how  could  he  prove  unfortunate  against 
tliis  insignificant  people  !  What  to  them  is  the 
God  of  Israel !  It  is  the  booty  that  hinders  his 
coming.  Booty,  of  course,  delays  the  victor  ;  for 
he  must  cause  it  to  be  divided.  The  mother  and 
her  women  naturally  think  first  of  the  booty  ;  to 
them,  that  is  the  pith  of  all  victories.  Their  fancy 
then  proceeds  to  picture  at  pleasure  the  conquered 
treasures.  How  much  time  must  it  take,  before 
every  soldier  has  the  two  maidens  wdiom  he  obtains 
as  booty,  assigned  to  him  ! 5  And  then  the  heap 
of  costly  clothing.  The  purple  garments  fall  nat- 
urally to  Sisera,  for  they  are  suitable  only  for 
princes.  But  each  of  the  others  also  obtains  em- 
broidered garments,  always  two  for  each  maiden 
that  fell  to  his  share.  In  this  strain  they  talk  with 
each  other,  and  already  imagine  themselves  to  be 
looking  over  the  goods  which  Sisera  is  bringing 
with  him.  But  all  at  once  the  message  comes  : 
No  booty,  no  victory  —  the  hero  is  dead,  the  army 
is  shattered  !    All  is  lost  —  the  castle  falls    .    .    .    . 

1  itC;?^?  V^W  *f?3-  HP®  invariably  ex- 
presses  the  act  of  looking  out  from  a  height,  from  a  moun- 
tain, for  instance,  or  from  heaven  ;  also  from  the  upper 
chambers  (Geu-  xxvi  8t,  to  which  persons  of  quality  (Eglon, 
for  example)  retired  to  cool  themselves. 

2  32Nrn,  33"*  occurs  only  in  this  passage.  It  is 
an.  onomatopoetic  word,  like  the  German  ''  jamme'n,'7  [cf. 
the  English  "  wailing.1']  In  Ohaldee,  however,  it  chiefly 
has  the  aense  of  ''crying,"  " sounding,"'  in  a  favorable  as 
well  as  unfavorable  sense. 

8  "Why  delay  i\Ti33~l!2  ^O^B."  D7B  may  be 
jsed  of  any  kind  of  repeated  motion,  like  that  of  treading  ; 
ind  therefore  also  of  the  rolling  of  wheels. 


So  perish  they  who  set  themselves  against  God. 
Fearful  sorrow  breaks  their  pride.  But  they  who 
love  God  conquer.  Their  type  is  the  sun,  who 
like  a  fame-crowned  victor,  every  morning,  every 
spring,  triumphs  gloriously,  with  hero-like  power, 
over  clouds  and  darkness. 

Account  must  here  be  given  for  departures  from 
the  ordinary  division  and  translation  in  ver.  30 
That  verse,  like  several  others  in  Deborah's  Song 
has  undergone  an  incredible  amount  of  conjecture 
and  emendation.     It  reads  as  follows  :  — 

bba;  npbrr  snub?  r4bn  i> 
-i?a.  wti-ib  D^nnnh  crn  -• 

NTJtpD1?  WJZ?  bbttf  3- 

D^as  bbttf  4- 
.bbt»  ^N^b  D\-,ep-i  »22  nnp-i  5- 

t  t       ••    :  -  :        •  -  t':  •        -  v         t':  - 

Victors  found  their  greatest  satisfaction  and  joy 
in  the  booty.  Hence.  Moses  also  makes  Pharaoh 
say  (Ex.  xv.  9) :  "I  will  pursue,  I  will  divide  the 
spoil."  The  women  took  for  granted  that  Sisera 
will  find  f/lS?!??)  much  booty,  and  that  conse- 
quently a  division  will  commence.  Lines  2-5 
point  out  the  method  of  the  division.  First  (line 
2)  each  man  gets  two  maidens,  or  women.  Then 
the  garments  are  divided.  But  how  this  was  done, 
depends  upon  the  explanation  of  line  5,  particu- 
larly of  the  words  bbttf  'HN-ISb.  The  difficulty  8 
under  which  expositors  labored,  originated  in  their 
failing  to  perceive  that  ^7?'  metns  the  booty  of 
maidens  mentioned  in  line  2.  It  cannot  be  denied 
that  •- vtC*  is  booty  of  persons  as  well  as  of  things, 
cf.  Num.  xxxi.  11.  Zech.  ii.  13(9)  says,  "They 
become  a  spoil   to  those  who  have  served  them." 

In  Isa.  x.  2,  widows  are  called  '7*?'  c'"-  ^er-  xx'- 
9,  as  also  Jer.  1. 10,  where  the  Chaldeans  are  spoken 
of  as  booty.  An  entirely  analogous  error  used  to 
be  made  in  interpreting  the  celebrated  chorus  in 
the  Antigone  of  Sophocles  :  — 

"Eoujs  av'iKCLTt  ixa.xa.Vi 

"Epws,  os  if  KTT}Liaai  iriTrrets  * 

the  word  KT-fiLiao-i  being  understood,  not  of  "  the 
unfree,"  but  always  of  things  (cf.  Weimar.  Jahr- 
buck  fur  Deutsche  Lit,  ii.  359).  The  "unfree" 
booty  consists  of  men.  animals,  and  things.  So  here, 

^7""  ^.^V  arc  t'le  necks  of  the  women  taken  as 
booty.  For  each  neck  two  cloths  are  allowed. 
Thus  the  D^nEI?"]   HOp^  of  line  5  corresponds 

to  the  E^rrerH  crn  of  line  2.  The  division  was 
thus  systematized.     As  many  women  as  each  had, 

4  rn^S    D^lWl.    The  mother  replies  herself  to  her 

T     '.'T-;  •    t 

own  words,  corrects  herself.  She  does  not  answer  tin 
others,  —  an  interpretation  neither  philologically  congruous 
nor  in  harmony  with  the  fact  that  they  have  not  said  any- 
thing which  the  mother  would  wish  to  refute.  Cf.  Job, 
xxxv.  4,  and  Prov.  xxii.  21. 

5  The  following  passage  from  a  letter  written  by  the  Em- 
peror Claudius  II.,  after  his  great  victory  over  the  Goths, 
may  serve  to  confirm  our  explanation  of  ver.  30  :  "  Tanlum 
mutierum  crpu?uts,  ur  binas  et  ternns  mulieres  viclitr  sibi 
wiles  possit  aifjunzere.'-      Trcbellius  Potlio,  cap.  Till. 

6  Observable  also  in  Keil's  exposition 


CHAPTER   V.  24-31. 


101 


io  many  times  did  he  receive  two  cloths  (for  doubt- 
less the  dual  form  here  really  signifies  the  dual 
number).     Now,  it  must  not  De  overlooked  that 

nS2(7^  is  used  only  in  connection  with  the  division 
of  the  cloths  according  to  the  number  of  maidens. 
Elsewhere  also  (Ezek.  xxvi.  16,  excepted)  i"l^l?~] 
appears  as  an  article  of  female  adornment,  cf.  Ps. 
xlv.  15,  for  instance;  also  in  Ezek.  xvi.  13,  the 
figure  is  that  of  a  woman.  This  confirms  the 
above  division,  and  explains  the  expression  of  line 

3:  S-JP"pb  CMS  bbtt'.  The  D^SaS 
which  the  chieftain  is  to  receive,  are  distinguished 
from  the  O^nOp"],  which  fall  to  the  maidens.  The 
latter  are  beautifully-colored  female  dress-cloths  ;  • 
the  former  belong  to  Sisera,  and  are  therefore  to 

be  taken  as  purple  garments-  It  is  true,  372S, 
in  itself,  means  only  to  dip,  i.  e.  to  dye ;  but  the 
spirit  of  the  passage  invites  us  to  think  not  of 
merely  colored,  but  of  purple-colored  garments, 
ref  ejoxV-  Such  garments  were  worn  by  princes 
in  battle  (cf.  Judg.  riii.  26),  and  distinguished 
kings  and  rulers ;  by  reason  of  which  it  was  an 
honor  for  Mordecai  to  wear  them  (Esth.  viii.  1 5  ;  cf. 
Rosenmiiller,  Morgenland,  iii.  37).  It  is  a  proud 
thought  for  Sisera's  mother,  that  the  princely  gar- 
ments belong  to  her  son.     The  repetition  of  the 

words  C,3J2"  ,£l£  (line  4)  is  to  be  taken  as 
expressive  of  this  her  joy.  The  women  do  not 
speak,  as  has  perhaps  been  supposed,  of  what  they 
themselves  shall  receive,  but  simply  represent  to 
themselves  how  much  time  must  be  consumed  in 
dividing  so  much  booty  among  so  many  persons, 
in  order  to  explain  that  which  so  greatly  needed 
explanation  —  the  delay  of  Sisera. 

We  omit  recounting  the  various  different  expo- 
sitions of  this  section.  Nor  is  room  allowed  us  to 
notice  the  manifold  endeavors  that  have  been  made 
to  analyze  the  arrangement  of  the  whole  Song. 
Neither  Roster's,  nor  Ewald's,  nor  Bertheau  s 
division  holds  good.  Le  Clerc  attempted  to  ar- 
range the  Song  according  to  endings  of  similar 
sound,  —  an  attempt  that  must  necessarily  fail.  On 
the  other  hand,  alliteration  is  of  such  frequent 
occurrence,  as  to  betray  more  than  anything  else 
the  presence  of  conscious  art.  Since  the  Song, 
however,  is  not  built  up  of  regular  strophes,  it  of 
course  cannot  be  subject  tu  the  same  regular  laws 
which  govern  the  Scandinavian  poems.  But  the 
alliterative  form,  in  its  perfect  freedom,  enhances 
the  power  of  the  Song  to  an  extraordinary  degree. 
It  resembles  in  its  effects  the  pebble-stones  of  the 
brook,  over  which  the  current  flows  with  aug- 
mented force.  It  would  transcend  the  limits  of  our 
present  task  to  institute  a  comparison  between  the 
various  productions  of  the  Hebrew  muse  with  ref- 
erence to  this  alliterative  form.  Let  it  suffice,  that 
in  the  rendering  of  the  original  we  have  endeav- 
ored to  give  prominence  to  the  delicacy  of  the 
alliteration  as  it  appears  in  this  Song  of  Deborah. 

And  the  land  rested  forty  years.  These 
words  do  not  belong  to  the  Song ;  but  connect 
themselves  with  the  prose  narrative,  at  ch.  iv.  24, 
nto  which  the  poem  was  inserted. 

1  [This  general  explanation  of  ("IQp"!,  as  cloth  or  gar- 
ments "  worked  in  colors,"  is  probably  to  be  preferred  to  the 
more  definite  "embroidered  in  colors,"  adopted  by  Dr.  Cassel 
in  his   translat;on  of  the   passage.     Keil   ton  Ex.  xxvi.  36) 

remarks   tha'     n   the   -inly    passage  where  the  verb   Cp"^ 


HOMILET1CAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

Deborah,  the  prophetic  Singer.  After  the  vic- 
tory, Deborah  sings  a  noble  song,  and  thereby 
enables  us  to  recognize  that  the  spirit  which  ani- 
mates her  is  the  spirit  of  prophecy.  The  other 
Judges  conquer  like  herself,  but  they  have  left  us 
no  songs  of  victory.  But,  indeed,  they  are  not 
said  to  have  been  prophets.  Only  prophetic 
tongues  can  sing.  True  poetry  is  a  sacred  art. 
For  that  reason,  all  prophecy  is  a  sublime  hymn 
on  judgment  and  divine  redemption.  Whatever 
the  prophet  sees,  he  proclaims  and  sings  to  the 
harp  of  faith.  What  they  believed,  that  they  spake. 
The  wonderful  works  of  God  are  always  spoken 
of  and  preached  with  other  tongues  and  in  ecstatic 
song.  Thus,  from  David's  time  till  now,  the 
church  of  God  has  sung.  Hallelujah  is  the  key 
note  of  all  church-hymns. 

But,  just  as  Deborah,  like  Moses  and  M'riam, 
sang  among  the  people,  so  the  prophecy  of  song  is 
not  confined  within  the  limits  of  the  church.  All 
popular  poetry  is  the  product  of  popular  faith. 
The  decay  of  literature  is  bound  up  in  the  decay 
of  prophetic  inspiration.  Rhymes  and  verbal  dec- 
orations do  not  rouse  the  masses.  But  when  the 
jubilant  heart,  redeemed,  strikes  up  its  Easter-song, 
then  every  pulse  will  brat  responses. 

Starke  :  Although  God  has  not  committed  the 
regular  office  of  preaching  to  women,  he  has  nev 
ertheless  many  times  imparted  his  prophetic  Spirit 
to  them,  and  through  them  has  spoken  great 
things.  —  The  same  :  All  who  share  in  the  bene- 
fits of  God,  should  also  join  in  bringing  Him 
praise  and  thanksgiving.  —  Gerlach  :  An  age  in 
which  this  sublime,  high-wrought,  and  spirited 
song  could  be  composed,  though  full  of  restless 
and  wildly  antagonistic  movements,  was  certainly 
not  without  deep  and  living  consciousness  of  the 
high  and  glorious  calling  of  the  covenant-people. 

[Wordsworth  :  We  have  a  song  of  victory  in 
Exodus ;  we  have  a  song  of  victory  in  Numbers ; 
we  have  a  song  of  victory  in  Deuteronomy  ;  we 
have  this  song  of  victory  in  Judges ;  we  have  a 
song  of  victory  in  the  first  of  Samuel ;  we  have 
a  song  of  victory  in  the  second  of  Samuel ;  we  have 
the  song  of  Zacharias,  and  the  Magnificat,  or  Song 
of  the  Blessed  Virgin,  and  the  song  of  Simeon,  in 
the  Gospel ;  and  all  these  songs  are  preludes  to 
the  new  song,  the  song  of  Moses  and  of  the  Lamb, 
which  the  Saints  of  the  Church  glorified,  from  all 
nations,  will  sing,  at  the  crystal  sea,  with  the  harps 
of  God,  when  all  the  enemies  of  Christ  and  his 
Church  will  have  been  subdued,  and  their  victory 
will  he  consummated  forever  (Rev.  xiv.  1-3;  xv. 
2-4).  —  The  same  (on  ver.  17):  Here,  in  Dan 
and  Asher,  is  the  second  hindrance  to  zeal  for 
(iod's  cause;  the  other  was  that  in  the  case  of 
Reuben  —  comparative  distance  from  the  scene  of 
danger,  and  rural  occupation  (see  vers.  15,  16). 
They  who  live  in  commercial  and  maritime  cities, 
engaged  in  worldly  business,  are  tempted  to  prefer 
their  own  worldly  interest  to  the  cause  of  God  and 
his  Church.  They  who  thus  act,  imitate  Dan,  and 
forfeit  the  blessing  of  Deborah.  They  also  who 
live  in  country  villages,  removed  from  the  din  of 
controversy,  and   engaged    in  farming  and   other 

occurs,  Ps.  exxxix.  15,  it  signifies  "  to  weave."  Robinson 
(KM  Repos.,  i.  610)  says:  "The  verb  Q|T^,  both  in 
Hebrew  and  Arabic,  signifies  to  diversify,  make  variegated, 
sc.  in  color;  and  is  not  necessarily  applied  tr  needlework.' 
Cf.  also  Bachmann,  in  toe.  —  Te.] 


108 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


rural  occupations,  have  strong  temptations  to  live 
merely  to  themselves,  and  to  stand  aloof  from  their 
brethren,  and  not  to  listen  to  Deborah's  voice,  and 
Tiot  to  flock  to  Barak's  standard,  and  fight  God's 
battle  together  with  them  against  the  heresy  and 
infidelity  which  assail  his  Church.  —  The  same 
Jon  ver.  18)  :  Zebulun  and  Naphtali,  in  "  Galilee 
of  the  Gentiles,"  sent  forth  champions  to  the  Lord's 
battle  against  the  enemies  of  the  Hebrew  Church  ; 
and  their  land  was  afterwards  honored  as  the  scene 
of  Christ's  preaching  (see  Matt.  iv.  13),  and  gave 
birth  to  many  of  the  Apostles,  the  first  champions 
of  the  Christian  Church  against  the  spiritual  Sise- 


ras  of  this  world.  —  The  same  (on  ver.  31 ) :  Aftei 
the  stirring  emotions  of  the  tempest  of  the  ele- 
ments, ami  the  rush  of  the  combatants,  and  the 
din  of  arms,  and  shock  of  battle,  described  with 
wonderful  energy  in  this  divine  poem,  the  land  had 
rest;  a  beautiful  contrast,  and  an  emblem  of  the 
peaceful  calm  which  will  prevail  when  the  storms 
of  this  world  will  be  lulled  in  the  Sabbath  of  Eter- 
nity.—  Henry  :  And  well  had  it  been  if,  when  the 
churches  and  the  tribes  had  rest,  they  had  been 
edified,  and  had  walked  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord.  — 
Tr.] 


FOURTH   SECTION. 


INCURSIONS  AND   OPPRESSIONS   OF   THE  MIDIANITES.     GIDEON,   THE   JUDGE  WHO   REFUSES   TO 

BE   KING. 


The  Midianites  invade  the   land  seven  years.     Israel  cries  to  Jehovah,  and  is  an 
swered  through  a  prophet,  who  reminds  them  of  their  sins. 

Chapter  VI.  1-10. 


1  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  did  evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  : 

2  and  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  delivered  them  into  the  hand  of  Midian  seven  years.  And 
the  hand  of  Midian  prevailed  [was  strong]  against  [over]  Israel :  and  because  of 
the  Midianites  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  made  them  the  dens  [grottoes]  which 

3  are  in  the  mountains,  and  [the]  caves,  and  [the]  strong  holds.  And  so  it  was, 
when  Israel  had  sown  [his  fields],  that  the  Midianites  came  up.  and  the  Amalekites, 
and  the  children  [sons]  of  the  east,  even  they  came  up  against  them   [and  passed 

4  over  them]  : J  And  they  encamped  against  [upon]  them,  and  destroyed  [ruined] 
the  increase  [produce,  cf.  Deut.  xxxii.  22]  of  the  earth,  till  thou  come  unto  Gaza  ; 

[>  and  left  no  sustenance  -  for  [in]  Israel,  neither  sheep,  nor  ox,  nor  ass.  For  they 
came  up  with  their  cattle  and  their  tents,  and  they  came  as  grasshoppers  [locusts] 
for  multitude  ;  for  both  they  and  their  camels  were  without  number  :  and  they 

6  entered  into  the  land  to  destroy  [ruin]  it.  And  Israel  was  greatly  impoverished 
[reduced]  because  of  the  iNIidianites  ;  and  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  cried  unto 

7  the  Lord  [Jehovah].     And  it  came  to  pass,  when  the  children   [sons]  of  Israel 

8  cried  unto  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  because  of  the  Midianites,  That  the  Lord  [Jehovah] 
sent  a  prophet  unto  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel,  which  [and  he]  said  unto  them. 
Thus  saith  the  Lord  [Jehovah,  the]  God  of  Israel,  I  brought  you  up  from  Egypt 
[cf.  1  Sam.  x.  18]  and  brought  you  forth  out  of  the  house  of  bondage  [Ex.  xiii.  3]  ; 

9  And  I  delivered  you  out  of  the  hand  of  the  Egyptians,  and  out  of  the  hand  of  all 
that  oppressed  you,  and  drave  them  out  from  before  you,  and  gave  you  their  land ; 

10  And  I  said  unto  you,  I  am  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  your  God  ;  fear  not  [ye  shall  not 
fear,  i.  e.  reverence]  the  gods  of  the  Amorites,  in  whose  land  ye  dwell :  but  ye  have 
not  obeyed  my  voice. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 
1  Ver.  8  —  V  ;V  ?\?y)  :  literally.  "  canie  up  upon  him,'*  or,  ft  came  up  against  him."     Dr.  Cassel  supplies  «in*tfi? 

T  T  T    :  "  T 

after  3?HT,  and  accordingly  makes  "him1'  refer  to  "field."     But  although  this  rendering  suits  the  connection  admlra- 

-T 

bly  well,  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  the  Hebrew  writer  would  have  left  the  accusative  after  V"1^  unexpressed  if  he  had 


CHAPTER   VI.    1-10. 


109 


Intended  to  refer  back  to  it  by  means  of  a  pronoun,  especially  when  the  latter  could  so  readily  be  referred  to  anothej 
noun.      V73?  ^V^?"!   simply  adds   the  idea  of  hostility,  which  the  preceding  H  *V  left  unexpressed.     In  like  man 

her.  CrP  sV ,   in  the  next  verse,  explains  that  the  "  encamping "  was  "  against "  Israel  —  had  hostile  purposes  in 
view.  —  Tr.] 

[-  Ver.  4.  —  PPntD  :  Br.  Cassel,  Lebensmitteln,  "means  of  life."  So  also  Keil  :  "They  left  no  provisions  (produce 
Df  the  field)  in  Israei,  and  neither  sheep,  nor  cattle,  nor  ass."  Dr.  Cassel,  in  a  foot-note,  gives  a  simple  reference  to 
2  Chron.  xiv.  12  (13),  where,  however,  the  word  unquestionably  means  anything  "alive."  Bertheau  adopts  that  mean, 
lug  here  ;  but  cf.  ch.  xvii.  10.  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL   AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  1 .  And  Jehovah  delivered  them  into  the 
hand  of  Midian.  Of  the  death  of  Deborah  ami 
Barak,  no  mention  is  made ;  the  peace  which  their 
great  deeds  procured  lasted  forty  years.  But  those 
deeds  were  already  forgotten  again  ;  and  with  them 
the  God  whose  Spirit  had  begotten  them.  Then 
fresh  bondage  and  misery  came,  and  reminded  the 
people  of  Him  who  alone  can  save.  Numerous 
tribes  of  eastern  nomads  invaded,  plundered,  and 
devastated  the  land.  The  transjordanic  tribes  could 
at  that  time  offer  them  no  such  resistance  as,  ac- 
cording to  1  Chron.  v.  10,  19,  they  were  able,  at  a 
later  date,  to  make  against  the  Hagarites,  Jetur, 
Nephish,  and  Nodab.  The  present  invaders  are 
called  Midian,  and  appear  in  league  with  Amalek 
and  the  "  sons  of  the  east."  The  Midianites  are 
wandering  tribes  in  the  desert  of  Sinai,  in  the 
neighborhood  of  the  Moabites,  answering  both  in 
name  and  manner  of  life  to  the  Bedouins.     In  the 

constantly  occurring  interchange  of  J2  and  3  (m 
and  b)  in  the  Semitic  dialects,  the  Arabic  tongue 
seems  to  prefer  the  2,  while  the  Hebrew  inclines 
to  the  O  (cf.  Timnath  and  Tibneh).  The  Bedouin 
derives  his  name  from  the  Arabic    !"I^S2,  the 

desert ;  an  expression  of  which  the  Hebrew  T^i 
to  be  desolate  and  waste,  readily  reminds  one.    The 

derivation  from  "12"TO,  formerly  current,  is  too 
artificial,  since  the  prominent  idea  of  the  term 
Bedouin  is  not  a  reference  to  pasture  lands,  but  to 
the  desert.     The  name  Midian  manifestly  belongs 

to   the  same  root —  7"H53      being   the   same   as 

p'Gi  primitive  Bedawin,  who,  like  the  Towara  of 
the  present  day  (Ritter,  xiv.  937),  engaged  in  the 
carrying  trade  between  the  Euphrates  and  Egypt, 
and  in  general  pillage.  Not  all  desert  tribes  boast 
the  same  descent,  as  in  fact  the  Ishmaelites  and 
the  Midianites  did  not  belong  to  the  same  familv  ; 
both,  however,  followed  similar  modes  of  life,  and 
hence  are  sometimes  designated  by  one  and  the 
same  name  (Gen.  xxxvii.  25,  28;  Judg.  viii.  22, 

1  A  Madian  near  the  Arabian  Gulf  is  mentioned  by 
Abulfeda;  cf.  Geogr.,  ed.  Paris,  p.  86  ;  Arnold,  in  Herzog's 
ReoMncykl.,  i.  463. 

2  [Keil  :  "  The  power  of  the  Midianites  and  their  con- 
federates bore  so  heavily  on  the  Israelites,  that  these  fmade 
for  themselves  the  clefts  which  are  in  the  mountains,  and 
the  caves,  and  the  strongholds,'  those,  namely,  which  were 
afterwards  (at  the  time  when  our  Book  was  written)  every- 
where to  be  found  in  the  land,  and  in  times  of  war  offered 
secure  places  of  refuge.     This  is  indicated  by  the  definite 

article  before  iTl~iri3D  and  the  other  su  >stantives.      The 

T  :  • 
words,   c  they  made    for    themselves,'  are    not    at  variance 
Irith  the  fact  that  in  the  limestone  mountains  of  Palestine 
Jaere  exist   many  natural  caves      For,  on  the  one  hand, 
hey  do  not  affirm  that  all  the  caves  found  in  the  land  were 


24).  They  are  dwellers  in  tents,  as  contrasted 
with  those  who  till  the  earth  or  dwell  in  cities. 

Ver.  2.  And  the  sons  of  Israel  made  them 
the  grottoes  which  are  in  the  mountains,  and 
the  eaves  and  the  strongholds.     The  word  for 

grottoes  is  DIT^O,  and  an  entirely  satisfactory 
desci'iption  of  them  is  given  by  Wetzstein  (Hau- 
ran,  p.  45)  :  "At  some  rocky,  elevated,  and  dry 
place,  a  shaft  was  sunk  obliquely  into  the  earth; 
and  at  a  depth  of  about  twenty-five  fathoms,  strtets 
were  run  oft'  straight,  and  from  six  to  eight  paces 
wide,  in  the  sides  of  which  the  dwellings  were  ex- 
cavated. At  various  points  these  streets  were  ex- 
tended to  double  their  ordinary  width,  and  the 
roof  was  pierced  with  airholes,  more  or  less  numer- 
ous according  to  the  extent  of  the  place.  These 
airholes  are  at  present  called  rfisen,  plural  rawasin 
(windows)."  From  this  may  be  seen  how  accu- 
rately Rasclii  and  Kimchi  explained  the  above  word, 
when  they  made  it  mean  "caves  with  air-holes 
like  windows."  The  remark  of  R.  Tanchum  is  like- 
wise correct,  that  watchmen  were  employed,  who 
gave  alarm  signals  when  the  enemy  approached.  As 
soon  as  these  were  given,  the  ploughmen  and  herds 
hurried  quickly  into  the  earth,  and  were  secure. 
Commonly,  says  Wetzstein,  these  excavations  had 
a  second  place  of  exit ;  and  consequently,  in  a 
region  whose  inhabitants  are  liable  to  constant 
attacks  from  the  desert  (he  speaks  of  the  Hauran), 
are  regardeil  as  strongholds.  Quite  appropriate, 
apparently,  is  the  rendering  of  that  Greek  version 

which  translates  r"Hn3SD  by  fj.dv$pa,  an  inclosed 
space,  a  fold,  stable.  In  later  times,  eastern  monks, 
who  lived  in  such  grottoes,  called  the  cloister  itself 
fj.di'Spa.- 

Vers.  3,  4.  Till  thou  come  unto  Gaza.3  They 
were  expeditions  for  plunder  and  devastation,  such 
as  the  Bedouin  tribes  of  the  present  day  are  still 
accustomed  to  undertake  against  hostile  commu- 
nities.4 Their  general  direction  was  towards  the 
plain.  The  invaders,  however,  did  not  content 
themselves  with  ruining  the  growing  crops  from 
east  to  west,  but  also  scoured  the  land  towards  the 
south.  Gaza,  moreover,  formerly  as  in  later  times, 
was  the  great  bazaar  of  stolen  wares,  brought  to- 
made  at  that  time  by  the  Israelites,  nor  on  the  other  does 
ntl'27,  to  make,  exclude  the  use  of  natural  caves  for  pur- 
poses of  safety,  since  it  applies  not  only  to  the  digging  and 
laying  out  of  new  caves,  but  also  to  the  fitting  up  of  nat- 
ural  oues For   the    rest,    these   clefts,   caves,   and 

strongholds,  were  to  serve,  not  merely  as  hiding-places  foi 
the  fugitive  Israelites,  but  much  more  as  places  of  conceal- 
ment and  security  for  their  property  and  the  necessaries  of 
life.  For  the  Midianites,  like  genuine  Bedouins,  were  more 
intent  on  plunder  and  pillage,  and  the  desolation  of  th< 
country,  than  on  the  destruction  of  the  people.''  —  Tr.] 

3  On  Gaza,  cf.  the  Com.  on  ch.  xvi.  1. 

4  [See  Thomson.  The  Lan.il  ami  the  Book,  ii.  163  ;  Kitto 
Daily  Bible  Illustrations,  Moses  an  i  the  *udgest  p.  340,  et« 
—  Tr.1 


110 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


gether  there  by  the  Bedouins  from  their  expedi- 
tions (Ritter,  xiv.  924 ).' 

Ver.  5.  As  locusts  (Sept.  ixpis,  cf.  //.  xxi.  12) 
for  multitude:  a  comparison  suggestive  both  of 
their  numbers  and  of  the  effects  of  their  presence. 
The  Midianite  deva-tation  was  like  that  bv  locusts. 
In  Hauran,  says  Wetzstein,  various  plagues  are 
found ;  the  locust  is  bad,  but  the  worst  are  the 
Bedouins  (p.  43).  A  Bedouin  said  to  him  :  "  The 
Ruwala  have  become  like  the  hosts  of  God,"  ■'.  e., 
numerous  as  the  locusts,  for  these  are  culled  Gtintid 
Allah  (Hauran,  p.  138).  —  Camels  without  num- 
ber. In  such  extravagant  hyperbolisms  the  speech 
of  Orientals  has  always  abounded.  When  Burk- 
hardt  asked  a  Bedouin,  who  belonged  to  a  tribe  of 
three  hundred  tents,  how  many  brothers  he  had, 
throwing  a  handful  of  sand  into  the  air,  he  re- 
plied, "  equally  numberless."  The  invaders'  object 
was  not  to  gather  the  harvest,  but  only  to  destroy 
What  they  needed,  they  had  with  them  —  cattle, 
tents,  and  camels. 

Vers.  6-10.  And  the  sons  of  Israel  cried  unto 
Jehovah.     When   the   people  were  brought    low 

(v5J3)'  they  repented.  Distress  teaches  prayer. 
With  Israel  repentance  went  hand  in  hand  with 
the  remembrance  of  their  former  strength.  They 
lose  themselves  when  they  lose  their  God ;  they 
find  themselves  when  they  turn  to  Him.  This  the 
prophet  sets  before  them.  The  words  put  into 
the  mouth  of  the  unknown  preacher,  reproduce  the 
old  penitential  discourse.  In  various  but  similar 
forms  that  discourse  ever  reappears  ;  for  it  rests  on 
Mosaic  warnings  and  declarations  whose  truth  all 
the  fortunes  of  Israel  confirm.     For  the  first  time, 

however,  the  verb  ^*!?^t  to  fear,  elsewhere  used  only 
with  reference  to  God,  is  here  connected  with  heathen 
gods  ;  but  only  to  point  out  the  fact  that  disobedient 
Israel  has  yielded  to  idol  gods  the  reverence  which  it 
owed  to  the  eternal  God.  When  such  rebukes  are 
gladly  heard  by  the  people,  deliverance  is  near  at 
hand.  When  "they  believe  themselves  to  have  de- 
served such  admonitions  and  punishments,  they 
again  believe  God.  In  accepting  the  judge,  we  se- 
cure the  deliverer.  Such  is  the  historical  experience 
of  all  ages. 

H0MILET1CAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 
Israel  had  again   apostatized,  notwithstanding 

1  [Bertheau  :  n  Since  the  expeditions  of  eastern  tribes 
follow  the  same  plan  at  every  repetition,  and  since,  accord- 
ing to  ver.  33,  they  encamped  in  the  valley  of  Jezreel,  and 
moreover  made  their  incursion  with  their  herds  and  camels, 
It  is  evident  that  they  must  have  entered  the  country  by 
the  one  great  connecting  road  between  the  East  and  Pales- 


tine victory  and  the  song  of  Deborah.  Sailer 
"  When  one  has  drunk,  he  turns  his  back  upon 
the  fountain ;  but  it  is  only  the  ingrate  who  do?s 
this."  Israel  was  altogether  as  it  had  been  for- 
merly, but  God's  judgment  assumes  a  new  form. 
Greater  than  ever  was  the  humiliation.  Israel 
was  not  simply  oppressed  by  a  tyranny  like  that 
of  Sisera,  who  was  in  the  land,  but  it  was  like  a 
slave  who  toils  for  a  foreign  master.  Had  it 
accomplished  its  task  ?  Midian  came  and  seized 
the  fruit.  So  he  who  falls  away  from  God  who 
gives,  must  for  that  very  reason  serve  sin,  which 
takes.  —  Starke  :  The  strongest  fortress,  defense, 
and  weapon,  with  which  in  danger  we  can  protect 
ourselves,  is  prayer. 

[Bp.  Hall:  During  the  former  tyranny,  Deb- 
orah was  permitted  to  judge  Israel  under  a  palm- 
tree;  under  this,  not  so  much  as  private  habita- 
tions will  be  allowed  to  Israel.  Then,  the  seat  of 
judgment  was  in  sight  of  the  sun  ;  now,  their  ver) 
dwellings  must  be  secret  under  the  ecrth.  They 
that  rejected  the  protection  of  God,  are  glad  to 
seek  to  the  mountains  for  shelter;  and  as  they  had 
savagely  abused  themselves,  so  they  are  fain  to 
creep  into  dens  and  caves  of  the  rocks,  like  wild 
creatures,  for  safeguard.  God  had  sown  spiritual 
seed  amongst  them,  and  they  suffered  their  hea 
thenish  neighbors  to  pull  it  up  by  the  roots ;  and 
now,  no  sooner  can  they  sow  their  material  seed, 
but  Midianites  and  Amalekites  are  ready  by  force 
to  destroy  it.  As  they  inwardly  dealt  with  God, 
so  God  deals  outwardly  by  them  ;  their  eyes  may 
tell  them  what  their  souls  have  done  ;  yet  that 
God  whose  mercy  is  above  the  worst  of  our  sin, 
sends  first  his  prophet  with  a  message  of  reproof, 
and  then  his  angel  with  a  message  of  deliverance. 
The  Israelites  had  smarted  enough  with  their  ser- 
vitude, yet  God  sends  them  a  sharp  rebuke.  It  is 
a  good  sign  wrhen  God  chides  us  ;  his  round  repre- 
hensions are  ever  gracious  forerunners  of  mercy  ; 
whereas,  his  silent  connivance  at  the  wicked  argues 
deep  and  secret  displeasure ;  the  prophet  made 
way  for  the  angel,  reproof  for  deliverance,  humil 
iation  for  comfort.  —  Henry:  Sin  dispirits  men, 
and  makes  them  sneak  into  dens  and  caves.  The 
day  will  come,  when  chief  captains  and  mighty 
men  will  call  in  vain  to  rocks  and  mountains  to 
hide  them.  —  Tr.1 


tine,  which  crosses  the  depression  of  the  Jordan  near  Beth- 
shean,  and  issues  into  the  plain  of  Jezreel.  The  extension 
of  their  inroads  thence,  is  indicated  by  the  fact  that  Gaza, 
at  the  southwestern  extremity  of  the  land,  is  named  as  the 
limit  of  their  advance.''  Cf.  Dr.  CaBsel's  remarks  on  ver. 
11,  p.  111.  —  Tr.] 


The  Angel  of  Jehovah  appears  to  Gideon,  and  comm'ssions  him  to  deliver  Israel. 
Chapter  VI.  11-24. 


11  And  there  came  an  angel  of  the  Lord  [Jehovahj,  and  sat  under  an  [the]  oak 
which  rvas  [is]  in  Ophrah,  that  pertained  unto  Joash  the  Abi-ezrite :  and  his  son 
Gideon  threshed  [was  threshing]  1  wheat  by  [in]  the  wine-press,  to  hide  it  from  the 

12  Midianites.  And  the  angel  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  appeared  unto  him,  and  said 
unto  him,  The  Lord  [Jehovah]    is  with  thee,  thou  mighty  man  of  valour  [valiant 

'3  hero].     And  Gideon  said  unto  him,  O  [Pray.]  my  Lord,  if  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  be 


CHAPTER   VI.   11-24. 


Ill 


with  us,  why  then  is  all  this  befallen  us  ?  and  where  be  all  his  miracles  which  our 
fathers  told  us  of,  saying,  Did  not  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  bring  us  up  from  Egypt ; 
but  now  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  hath  forsaken  us,  and  delivered  us  into  the  hands  of 

14  the  Midianites.  And  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  looked  upon  [turned  towards]  him,  anc 
said,  Go  in  this  thy  might,  and  thou  shalt  save   [and  save  thou]  Israel  from  the 

15  hand  of  the  Midianites:  have  not  I  sent  thee?  And  he  said  unto  him,  0  [Pray,] 
my  Lord,2  wherewith  shall  I  save  Israel?  behold,  my  family  is  poor  [the  most 
insignificant]   in   Manasseh,   and   I   am   the   least  [youngest]   in   my   father's   house. 

16  And  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  said  unto  him,  Surely  [Nay,  but]  I  will  be  with  thee,  and 

17  thou  shalt  smite  the  Midianites  as  one  man.  And  he  said  unto  him,  If  now  I  have 
found  grace  in  thy  sight,  then  shew  me  a  sign  that  [it   is]  thou  [who]    talkest  with 

18  me.  Depart  not  hence,  I  pray  thee,  until  I  come  [again]  unto  thee,  and  bring  forth 
my  present,  and  set  it  before  thee.    And  he  said,  I  will  tarry  until  thou  come  again. 

19  And  Gideon  went  in,  and  made  ready  a  kid,  and  unleavened  cakes  of  an  ephah  of 
flour  :  the  flesh  he  put  in  a  [the]  basket,  and  he  put  the  broth  in  a  [the]  pet,  and 

20  brought  it  out  unto  him  under  the  oak,  and  presented  it.  And  the  angel  of  God 
said  unto  him,  Take  the  flesh  and  the  unleavened  cakes,  and  lay  them  upon  this 

21  [that]  rock,  and  pour  out  the  broth.  And  he  did  so.  Then  [And]  the  angel  of 
the  Lord  [Jehovah]  put  forth  the  end  of  the  staff  that  was  in  his  hand,  and  touched 
the  flesh  and  the  unleavened  cakes  ;  and  there  rose  up  fire  out  of  the  rock,  and 
consumed  the  flesh  and  the  unleavened  cakes.     Then  [And]  the  angel  of  the  Lord 

22  [Jehovah]  departed  [disappeared]  out  of  his  sight,  And  when  [omit :  when]  Gideon 
perceived  that  he  ivas  an  angel  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah,  and]  Gideon  said,  Alas,  O 
Lord  God  [Jehovah]  !  for  because  8  I  have  seen  an  angel  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah] 

23  face  to  face.     And  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  said  unto  him,  Peace  be  unto  thee ;  fear 

24  not :  thou  shalt  not  die.  Then  [And]  Gideon  built  an  altar  there  unto  the  Lord 
[Jehovah],  and  called  it  Jehovah-shalom  [Jehovah  (is)  Peace] :  unto  this  day  it  i$ 
yet  in  Ophrah  of  the  Abi-ezrites. 

TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  11. — Literally,  "  was  beating  "  (tTpn)  sc.  with  a  stiek,  paPSifav-     The  more  usual  word  for  threshing  is 

tC*l^T.  Threshing  was  generally  done  by  treading  with  oxen,  or  by  means  of  a  dragdike  machine  drawn  over  the  grain 
by  oxeu  or  other  animals.  But  for  small  quantities,  and  for  certain  minor  seeds  (Isa.  xxviii.  27),  a  stick  was  used,  cf. 
Ruth  ii.  17  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  15.  —  S3"TS  :  thus  pointed,  this  word  always  refers  to  God,  and  the  possessive  suffix  (for  such  **"  18  most 
probably)  is  lost  sight  of.  tf  From  the  words  in  ver.  15  Gideon  perceived  that  he  who  talked  with  him  was  not  a  mere 
man.  Hence,  he  now  no  longer  says  :  f  Pray,  my  lord  '  (^DIS,  ver.  13),  but,  f  Pray.  Lord  '  (^3~TS,  God  the  Lord)." 
So  Keil  Dr.  Cassel  apparently  points  the  text  here  as  in  ver.  13,  for  he  translates  "  My  Lord."  Compare  what  he  says 
on  ver.  17.  —  Tr.] 

[3  Ver.  22  —  13" 73?_,*3  :  tr  for  therefore,'1  "  for  on  tbia  account."  Dr.  Cassel  renders  it  here  by  also,  "  so  then  " 
(illative).  But  the  phrase  regularly  indicates  the  ground  or  reason  for  what  goes  before,  cf.  Gen.  xviii.  5  ;  xix.  8 ; 
xxxlii-  10  ;  etc  :  and  Ewald,  Grain  353  a.  Gideon's  thought  is  :  "  Woe  is  me  1  for  therefore  —  seii.  to  give  me  cause  for 
my  apprehension  of  danger — have  I  seen."  etc.  Cf.  Bertheau  and  Keil.  The  E.  V.  would  be  rendered  accurate  enough 
hy  striking  out  either  "for"  or  "because."  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  11.  In  Ophrah.  The  place  is  expressly 
designated  as  belonging  to  the  family  of  Abiezer, 
to  distinguish  it  from  another  Ophrah  in  Benja- 
min (Josh,  xviii.  13),  Abiezer  was  a  son  of  Ma- 
nasseh, whose  seacs  were  on  this  side  the  Jordan 
(.Tosh.  xvii.  2).  To  the  western  half  tribe  of  Ma- 
nasseh, belonged  also  Beth-shean  (Scythopolis), 
Jihleam,  Taanach,  Megiddo,  the  fertile  districts 
if  the  plain  of  Jezreel.  Manasseh  therefore  suf- 
(■red  especially,  when  the  Midianites  crossed  the 
Jordan  near  Beisan,  in  order  to  desolate  the  land. 
From  vers.  33-35  it  may  be  inferred  that  Ophrah 
was  situated  in  the  northwestern  part  of  the  plain, 
«i  the  direction  of  Dora,  which  likewise  belongs  to 


Manasseh.  Since  the  enemy,  after  crossing  the 
Jordan,  encamped  in  Jezreel,  and  Gideon  invoked 
assistance  against  them  from  Asher,  Naphtali,  and 
Zebulun,  this  inference  may  be  considered  tolera- 
bly certain.  That  Asher  was  called  on,  shows  that 
Ophvah  was  in  the  West,  and  the  appeal  to  Naph- 
tali and  Zebulun  indicates  that  it  lay  to  the  north  ; 
since  otherwise  the  army  of  Midian  would  have 
prevented  a  junction.  Ophrah  was  inhabited  by 
a  branch  of  the  family  of  Abiezer,  at  whose 
head  Joash  stood  ;  but  among  them  dwelt  others* 

C">"yn  'KnS,  "themenof  the  city," ver.  27),  who 
were  probably  of  the  original  inhabitants  whom 
Manasseh  had  suffered  to  remain. 

Under  the  oak,  H^SH  Hnjjl.      Septnagint 


112 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


I      reoefiivBos   (interchangeable  with  repe&ivSos),  the 
terebinth.      The    Targums   have    SS3t2-12,     oak. 

H7S  and  ]i vS  are  evidently  different  species  of 
the  same  stately  tree,  and  probably  differ  from  each 
other  as  the  quercus  and  ilex.  The  oak  and  tere- 
binth are  too  little  alike  to  make  it  probable  that 
they  had  almost  the  same  name,  flex  is  clearly 
a  cognate  term.  Bottiger's  remarks  about  an 
"ancestral  terebinth,"  and  a  "sacred  tree"  under 
which  "Jehoyah  appears"  (Baumkultm  der  Hel- 
lenen,  p.  521),  have  no  support  in  the  passages  in 
which  those  trees  are  mentioned.  The  magnificent 
tree  afforded  a  grateful  shade,  and  therefore  in- 
vited persons  to  sit  and  rest  beneath  it.  Whoever 
knows  the  East,  knows  also  how  to  estimate  the 
value  of  shade  ; 1  though  indeed  everywhere  a 
'arge  tree  near  a  homestead  or  in  a  village,  be- 
comes the  meeting  and  resting-place  of  the  inhab- 
itants as  well  as  the  traveller.  Besides,  the  tree  in 
Ophrah  has  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  what 
farther  happens.  The  whole  section  in  Bottiger's 
book  is  a  misunderstanding.  The  tree  is  men- 
tioned here  only  to  make  it  appear  natural  that  a 
stranger  could  seat  himself  under  it  without  draw- 
ing special  attention  and  exciting  surprise. 

And  his  son  Gideon  was  threshing  wheat  in 
the  wine-press.  In  German,  also,  "  wine-press  " 
(Kelter)  sometimes  stands  for  the  place  in  which 
the  pressing  is  done,  as  well  as  for  the  vat  into 
which  the  wine  flows.     The  same  is  the  case  in 

Hebrew.     While  J~l?  is  the  press-house  or  place, 

2!£.  stands  for  the  vat;  but  they  are  frequently 
interchanged.  Here  it  is  of  course  the  place,  of 
which  Gideon  makes  use  to  thresh  wheat ;  thresh- 
ing on  exposed  threshing-floors  being  avoided  on 
account  of  the  pillaging  propensities  of  the  Mid- 
ianites.  Here  that  had  again  come  to  pass  which 
Deborah  lamented,  and  the  cure  of  which  she  had 

celebrated  in  her  song  —  there  was  no  T^Q,  no 
open  country,  in  the  land. 

Vers.  12,  'l3.  And  the  Angel  of  Jehovah  ap- 
peared unto  him.  Hitherto  JTJfT  TJsVo  always 
signified  a  human  messenger  of  God  (cf.  ch.  ii.  1  ; 
v.  23).  Here  it  is  otherwise.  The  mention  of  a 
"  prophet  of  Jehovah  "  in  ver.  8,  already  indicated 
that  the  TIS7O  now  spoken  of,  is  not  a  human 
messenger.  That  hint  is  now  rendered  plain  and 
unmistakable  by  the  phrase  V7S  M"1*1,  there 
"appeared"  to  him,  which  is  only  used  when  the 
invisible  divine  nature  becomes  visible.  As  Gideon 
looked  up,  a  stranger  stood  before  him,  —  who, 
while  exhibiting  nothing  unusual  in  his  outward 
appearance,  must  yet  have  had  about  him  that 
which  commanded  reverence.  This  stranger  greeted 
him. 

Jehovah  (is)  with  thee,  thou  valiant  hero- 
Gideon  cannot  have  referred  this  greeting  merely 
to  heroic  deeds  of  war.  It  is  much  rather  the  evi- 
dent pleasure  of  the  stranger  in  the  nervous  energy 
and  vigor  with  which  he  threshes,  to  which  with  a 
sense  of  shame  he  replies.  True,  indeed,  he  is 
conscious  of  strength  and  energy ;  but  of  what 
avail  are  they?  Is  it  not  matter  of  shame  that  he 
cannot  even  thresh  his  wheat  on  the  threshing- 
floor  '  Hence  his  respectfully  spoken  answer:  No, 
nylorJ;  (iod  i-  not  with  me;  for  were  He  with 

1  Clearly  and  charmingly  apparent  in  Geu.  xviii.  1-4. 
-     Kf.il  :   "  In    this  thy  strength,  t.   e.,  in   the  strength 
vhtch  thou  now  host,  since  Jehoyah  is  with  thee.     The 


us,  would  such  things  come  upon  us  ?  would  I  bt 
driven  to  thresh  wheat  in  the  wine-press  ?  But 
this  answer  shows  that  he  believed  God ;  from  the 

greeting  (iTjiT)  he  had  perceived  that  he  stood  in 
the  presence  of  one  of  the  friends  and  confessors 
of  God.  It  shows,  also,  that  his  courageous  heart 
had  long  demurred  against  Israel's  dishonor.  The 
national  tradition  of  Israel's  ancient  glory  was 
not  vet  extinct.  The  deliverance  from  Egypt  was 
the  beginning  of  Israel's  nationality  and  freedom 
Doubtless,  says  the  strong  man,  then,  as  our  fath- 
ers tell  us,  God  was  with  Israel,  and  freed  us  from 
Egypt;  but  now  —  we  are  unable  to  defend  our- 
selves against  the  pillaging  Bedouins  !  The  doubt 
which  he  thus  utters,  does  not  spring  from  an  un- 
believing and  pusillanimous  soul.  He  gladly  be- 
lieved and  delighted  in  what  was  told  of  other 
days.  His  lament  is  that  of  a  patriot,  not  of  a 
traitor.  Because  such  is  his  character,  he  has  been 
found  eligible  to  become  the  deliverer  of  Israel. 
The  Angel  therefore  comes  to  him,  and  says  :  — 

Vers.  14-16.  Go  thou  in  this  thy  etrength3 
.  ...  do  not  I  send  thee?  The  dinere&v^  be- 
tween Gideon's  call  and  that  of  former  heroes, 
must  be  carefully  observed.  Of  Othniel  it  is  said, 
that  the  "  Spirit  of  Jehovah  "  was  with  him  ;  Ehud 
is  "  raised  up  "  to  be  "  a  deliverer ;  "  Barak  is  called 
through  the  prophetess.  The  latter  hero  does  not 
immediately  proceed  to  victory.  He  refuses  to  go, 
unless  Deborah  go  with  him.  In  Gideon's  ciise 
much  more  is  done.  An  angel  of  God  assumes 
the  human  form  in  order  to  call  him.  He  conde- 
scends to  work  miracles  before  him.  How  much 
more,  apparently,  than  Deborah  had  to  contend 
with,  must  here  be  overcome  by  the  angel!  The 
grounds  of  this  difference  have  been  profoundly 
indicated  in  the  preceding  narrative.  What  was 
the  all-important  qualification  demanded  of  one 
who  should  be  a  deliverer  of  Israel  >  Decided  and 
undivided  faith  in  God.  Faith  in  God  was  the  root 
of  national  freedom  in  Israel.  Whatever  energy 
and  enthusiasm  the  love  of  country  called  out 
among  the  Greeks  and  Romans  ;  that,'  faith  in  (iod 
called  out  in  Israel.  Israel  existed  in  God,  or  not 
at  all.  The  hero,  therefore,  who  would  fight  for 
Israel,  must  thoroughly  believe  in  God.  This 
faith,  undivided,  unwavering,  not  looking  to  earthly 
things,  and  unconcerned  about  life  or  danger  —  a 
perfect  unit  with  itself  in  devotion  to  God.  and 
therefore  hostile  to  the  idol  gods,  the  representa- 
tives of  the  enemies  —  this  faith  the  call  must  find 
in  him  whom  it  selected  for  the  work  of  deliver- 
ance. The  men  hitherto  called  did  not  come  from 
the  same  tribes.  Othniel  was  of  Judah  ;  Ehud  of 
Benjamin.  In  these  tribes,  the  worship  of  the  true 
God  was  less  mixed  with  that  of  the  false  gods, 
because  here  the  old  inhabitants  had  been  obliged 
to  yield.  Barak  was  of  Naphtali,  where  idolatry, 
though  existing  in  many  places  along  side  of  the 
true  worship,  did  certainly  not  prevail  as  in  Ma- 
nasseh.  Precisely  those  places  which  constituted 
the  richest  portion  of  this  half  tribe,  and  which 
consequently  suffered  most  from  the  inroads  of 
Midian,  namely,  the  cities  of  the  plain,  had  never, 
as  the  narrator  expressly  recorded,  been  vacated  by 
the  original  inhabitants.  They  had  continued  to 
dwell  in  Beth-shean,  Taanach,  Megiddo,  Jibleam 
and  Dor  (ch.  i.  27).  Here  altars 'of  Baal  raised 
themselves  everywhere,  fully  authorized  and  per- 
fectly unrestrained.     Amid  such  surroundings,  the 

demonstrative    'this'  refers  to  the  strength  now  imparted 
to  him  through  the  divine  promise."  —  Tr.] 


CHAPTER   VI.  11-24. 


Ill 


position  of  the  faithful  is  a  difficult  one  at  all  times, 
but  especially  in  evil  days,  when  Baal  seems  to 
triumph.  Their  hearts  become  saddened ;  and  the 
contrast  between  the  former  glory,  in  which  they 
so  gladly  believe,  and  the  present  impotence,  un- 
mans and  confuses  them.  If  the  modest  soul  of 
Gideon  is  to  be  prepared  for  bold  hazards  in  behalf 
of  the  truth  of  God,  he  must  first  be  fully  con- 
vinced that  God  is  still  what  He  was  anciently  in 
Israel ;  that  He  still  works  wonders,  and  in  them 
reveals  his  love  for  the  nation.  In  his  home  and 
in  his  city  he  is  surrounded  by  idolatry.  He,  the 
youngest,  is  to  assume  an  attitude  of  authority 
towards  all.  That  he  may  do  this  boldly  and  con- 
dently,  the  heavenly  visitant  must  inspire  him 
with  a  divine  enthusiasm  which  shall  rise  superior 
to  the  suggestions  of  common  prudence.  [The 
way  to  this  is  opened  by  the  promise,  "  But  I  will 
be  with  thee!  "  which  is  at  the  same  time  a  chal- 
lenge to  test  the  speaker.  —  Tr.]  The  narrative 
could  not,  in  so  few  sentences,  teach  the  love  of 
God,  which  will  thus  be  tested,  more  beautifully. 
Gideon  is  no  presumptuous  doubter.  It  is  his 
humility  that  requires  the  miracle.  He  builds  no 
expectations  on  his  personal  strength.  If  God  will 
show  that  He  is  truly  "with  him,"  he  is  ready  to 
do  everything.  He  asks  much,  because  he  deems 
himself  altogether  insufficient. 

Ver.  17.  Then  give  me  a  sign  that  thou  art 
He  who  talketh  with  me.  The  angel  appeared 
to  Gideon  as  man  ;  otherwise  he  could  neither  have 
seen  him,  nor  offered  him  food.  His  appearance 
must  have  been  venerable ;  for  Gideon  always  ad- 
dresses  him  deferentially  and   humbly,   with  the 

words  ""^nS  ""S,  "Pray,  my  lord."  Now,  when 
this  stranger  says,  "  I  send  thee  —  I  will  be  with 
thee,"  and  that  without  adding  who  He  is,  Gideon 
could  hardly  fail  to  conclude  that  He  who  addressed 
him  was  a  supernatural  being  ;  especially  as  these 
words  were  used  in  answer  to  his  own,  "  if  Jehovah 
were  with  us."  It  is,  therefore,  very  instructive 
that  the  doubtful  Gideon  asks  for  a  sign  to  know 
"  whether  thou  art  he  who  speaks  with  me,"  i.  e., 
whether  thou  art  one  who  can  say,  "  I  am  with 
thee,"  and  not  to  know  "  whether  thou  art  God," 
a  thought  which  he  is  not  yet  prepared  to  enter- 
tain. 

Vers.  18-20.  Depart  not  hence,  I  pray  thee, 
until  I  come  again  unto  thee.  Gideon  is  not 
vet  convinced ;  but  nevertheless  the  word  that  has 
been  spoken  burns  within  him.     The  remark  in 

ver.  14,  "")5?3,  and  Jehovah  turned  towards  him," 
was  doubtless  intended  to  intimate  that  the  heav- 
enly visitant  turned  his  face,  beaming  with  the 
light  of  holiness,  full  upon  Gideon.  Gideon  feels 
the  breath  of  divinity,  —  but  certain  he  is  not. 
Should  the  apparition  now  depart,  he  would  be  in 
twofold  dread.  He  will  gladly  do  whatever  is 
commanded  —  but,  is  the  commander  God  ?  He 
thinks  to  solve  this  question  by  means  of  the  duties 
of  hospitality  which  devolve  on  him.  Hence  he 
prays  him  to  remain,  until  he  has  entertained  him. 
He  is  not  so  poor,  but  that  he  can  offer  a  kid  and 
something  more  to  a  guest.  Flocks  of  goats  still 
form  a  considerable  part  of  Palestinian  wealth,  and 
tind  excellent  pasturage  in  the  plain  of  Jezreel. 
Time  permits  Gideon  to  prepare  only  unleavened 

1  The  aame  explanation  19  adopted  by  Josephus  and 
Philo,  and  is  not  to  be  rejected  as  Delitzsch  ( Genesis,  p.  383) 
Mid  others  have  done.  Genesis  sviii.  to  ver.  12  speaks  only 
»f  K  men."  But  as  they  only  seemed  to  be  men,  so  they 
anly  seemed  to  eat      The  instance  of  the  risen  Saviour  is 


cakes  ;  but  the  supply  is  bountiful,  for  he  uses  at 
ephah  (i.  e.,  a  measure  containing  about  1994 
according  to  others  1985,  or  only  1014,  Par.  cubic 
inches,  cf.  Bijckh,  Metrologische  Untersuchungen,  p. 
261)  of  flour  in  their  preparation.  That  which 
appears  singular,  is  the  statement  that  he  put  th« 

flesh  in  the  basket  (  /D).  Wherever  else  this  word 
occurs,  it  denotes  a  bread-basket.  The  explana- 
tion is,  that  Gideon  was  unwilling  to  call  a  ser- 
vant, and  hence  used  the  basket  for  both  bread 
and  meat.  He  requires,  however,  a  separate  "  pot " 
for  the  broth,  which  the  basket  cannot  hold.  He 
thinks  now  that  by  this  meal  he  will  learn  to  know 
his  guest.  Celestials,  according  to  popular  belief, 
took  no  earthly  food.  The  angel  who  appears  to 
Manoah,  says  (ch.  xiii.  16)  :  "  I  will  not  eat  of  tin 
bread."  True,  of  the  angels  who  came  to  Abra 
ham  (Gen.  xviii.  8),  it  is  said,  "  and  they  did  eat ; ! 
but  the  Targum  explains,  "  they  seemed  to  him  to 
eat."1  This  belief  has  no  resemblance  to  the 
Homeric  conception,  according  to  which  the  gods 
though  they  eat  not  bread  or  drink  wine  (Iliad,  t, 
•'541),  do  nevertheless,  like  mortals,  stretch  forlh 
their  hands  after  ambrosia  and  nectar.  The  angels, 
like  all  that  is  divine  in  the  Bible,  have  their  spir- 
itual abode  in  heaven,  with  nothing  earthly  about 
them,  consequently  with  no  corporeal  wants.    The 

explanation  of  Ps.  lxxviii.  25,  as  if  """^SK  ErH 
meant  bread  such  as  angels  feed  on,  is  erroneous 
(unhappily,  it  has  been  again  put  forth  by  Boh- 
mer,  in  flerzog's  Realencykl.  iv.  20)  ;  the  words 
have  long  since  been  properly  explained  ( by  Heng- 
stenberg  and  Delitzsch)  of  the  manna,  which  came 
from  heaven,  i.  e.,  from  on  high.  Hence,  as  late 
as  the  author  of  Tobias,  the  angel  is  made  to  say 
(Tob.  xii.  19) :  "  I  have  neither  eaten  nor  drunk, 
but  ye  have  seen  an  apparition."  Nor  did  Gideon 
err  in  his  expectations.     His  guest  does  not  eat. 

In   verse  20,    CTl  3WH    T[S  -"2    once   takes  the 

place  ni?T  TTS  r5?  5  but  the  rule  that  in  the 
Book  of  Judges  Jehovah  stands  regularly  for  the 
God  of  Israel,  Elohim  for  the  gods  of  the  heathen, 
is  not  thereby  destroyed.  This  is  shown  by  the 
article  prefixed  to  Elohim.  The  reason  for  the 
interchange  in  this  passage  lies  in  the  fact  that  the 
nature  of  the  angel,  as  a  divine  being,  here  begins 
to  declare  itself.  In  order  to  describe  the  angel 
who  speaks  to  Gideon  as  the  messenger  of  that 
unity  from  which  the  multitude  of  the  angels  pro- 
ceeds (hence    2,n7S),  the  narrator  introduces  the 

term  QV!  '^V1-  He  thereby  explains  how  the 
angel  in  his  individual  appearance,  can  neverthe- 
less contain  in  himself  the  power  of  God.  The 
Angel  of  Jehovah,  he  means  to  say,  is  none  other 
than  an  angel  of  the  Elohim ;  hence,  He,  the  mes- 
senger, speaks  as  Jehovah. 

Vers.  21-24.  And  the  Angel  of  Jehovah  put 
forth  the  end  of  his  staff.  The  angel,  like  a 
traveller,  but  also  like  the  prophets,  like  Moses 
and  Elijah,  carried  a  staff.  They  also  used  it,  as 
he  does,  to  work  miracles.  Among  the  Greeks 
likewise,  the  staff,  in  the  hands  of  iEscilapius  and 
Hermes,  for  instance,  is  the  symbol  of  the  divine 
power  to  awaken  and  subdue.2    The  angel  touches 

not  to  be  adduced,  for  angels  before  Christ  were  not  born 
like  Christ. 

2  On  the  subversion  of  the  staff  as  a  symbol  of  blessing! 
into  an  instrument  of  sorcery,  cf.  my  Eddiseken  Studien 
p.  76. 


114 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


the  flesh  and  bread,  and  they  ascend  in  fire.  What 
was  brought  as  a  gift  to  the  guest,  is  accepted  by 
fire  as  a  sacrifice.  Fire  is  the  element  in  which 
divine  power  and  grace  reveal  themselves.  A  flame 
of  fire  passed  between  the  parts  of  Abraham's  sac- 
rifice (Gen.  xv.  17).  Fire  came  down  on  the  offer- 
ings of  Solomon,  when  he  had  made  an  end  of 
praying,  and  consumed  them  (2  Chron.  vii.  1). 
Fire  fell  from  heaven  in  answer  to  Elijah's  prayer 
that  the  Lord  would  make  it  manifest  that  He  was 
God  in  Israel,  and  consumed  the  sacrifice  before 
the  eyes  of  the  rebellious  people  (1  Kgs.  xviii.  38). 
To  give  a  similar  sign,  the  angel  now  touched  the 
flesh  and  cakes.  By  the  fire  which  blazed  up,  and 
by_  the  disappearance  of  his  visitor,  Gideon  per- 
ceived that  his  gnest  was  actually  a  celestial  bemg, 
who  had  called  down  fire  from  above.  He  was 
perfectly  convinced.  No  doubt  could  any  longer 
maintain  itself,  and  in  place  of  it  fear  seized  upon 
him. 

And  Gideon  said,  Ah  Lord  Jehovah !  Gid- 
eon makes  this  exclamation,  because,  like  Manoah 
(ch.  xiii.  22),  he  thinks  that  he  must  die;  for  he 
has  seen  what  oidinarily  no  living  man  does  see. 
This  view  is  deeply  rooted  in  the  Israelitish  idea 
of  God,  and  directly  opposed  to  Hellenic  concep- 
tions. In  fact,  heathenism,  as  pantheism,  knows 
of  no  real  partition-wall  between  the  individual 
gods  and  men  (cf.  Nagelsbach,  Homer.  Theologie, 
p.  141)  ;  but  between  the  God  who  inhabits  the 
invisible  and  eternal,  and  man  who  dwells  in  the 
world  of  sense,  there  was  seen  to  be  an  absolute 
difference.  Every  human  being  is  too  sinful,  and 
too  much  under  the  dominion  of  sense,  to  en- 
dure the  immediate  glory  of  the  Incomprehensible. 
He  cannot  see  God,  to  whom  "  to  see  "  means  to 
receive  the  light  of  the  sun  into  eyes  of  flesh. 
When,  therefore,  Moses,  notwithstanding  that  he 
spake  with  God,  as  friend  converses  with  friend 
( Kx.  xxxiii  11),  would  see  his  glory,  the  answer 
was  (ver.  20)  :  "Thou  canst  not  see  my  face;  for 
no  man  sees  me,  and  continues  to  live."  It  is 
implied  in  this  idea,  that  only  the  living  man  can- 
not see  God,  that  to  see  Him  is  to  die.  That, 
therefore,  the  dead  can  see  Him,  is  an  inference 
close  at  hand,  and  important  for  the  0.  T.  doc- 
trine concerning  the  soul  and  immortality.  —  Gid- 
eon, however,  has  no  cause  for  lamentation,  for 
after  all  he  has  only  seen  the  man.  Jacob's  life 
also  was  preserved,  for  his  wrestling  had  been  with 
"  the  man  "  (Gen.  xxxii.  24,  31  (30)).  "  No  man 
hath  seen  God  at  any  time"  (John  i.  18).  When, 
therefore,  Philip  says,  "  Show  us  the  Father," 
Jesus  answers :  "  He  that  hath  seen  me,  hath  seen 
the  Father"  (John  xiv.  9).  Hence,  a  voice  is 
heard  —  the  voice  of  the  now  unseen  God  —  say- 
ing: "Fear  not;  thou  shalt  not  die !  "  It  was  for 
the  very  purpose  that  Gideon  might  live,  that  the 
angel  had  not  appeared  as  God.  The  wife  of 
Manoah  wisely  draws  this  same  conclusion  herself 
(ch.  xih.  23).  And  God  speaks  "Peace  "  to  him. 
Where  peace  is,  there  is  no  occasion  for  fear ;  for 
peace  is  the  fruit  of  reconciliation.  The  divine 
messenger  did  not  come  to  punish  Israel  still  fur- 
ther, but  to  bring  them  help.  When  He  comes  to 
save,  He  must  have  previously  forgiven.  This  for- 
giveness is  the  "  peace."  So  Gideon  understands  it, 

when  he  builds  an  altar,  and  calls  it  DlbC.'  niit^, 
God-Peace,  i,  e.,  the  Peace  of  God.     Humility  and 

1  l\iii  :  "  The  design  of  this  altar  ....  is  indi- 
s&ted  lu  the  name  given  to  it.  It  was  not  to  serve  for  sac- 
rifices, but  as  a  memorial  and  witness  of  the  theophany 
rrucnaufed  to  Gideon,  and  of  his  experience  that  Jehovah 


penitence  prompt  him  to  this.  Above,  in  ver.  13 
when  he  was  not  yet  certain  that  God  had  ap- 
peared to  him,  he  had  said  nothing  to  indicate  that  i 
was  Israel's  own  fault  that  God  was  not  with  them 
Of  this  he  becomes  conscious  while  standing  in  the 
presence  of  the  divine  messenger.  The  fear  that 
to  see  God  involves  death,  rests  first  of  all  on  the 
moral  ground  of  conscious  sinfulness.  Undoubt- 
ing  faith  is  ever  followed  by  true  repentance, 
namely,  love  for  truth.  Gideon  builds  his  altar  to 
the  Peace  of  God,  i.  e.,  to  his  own  reconciliation 
with  God,  and  salvation  from  the  judgment  of 
God.1  The  narrator  seizes  on  this  penitential 
feeling  of  Gideon's,  to  which  he  joyfully  conse- 
crated his  altar,  and  by  means  of  it  continues  the 
thread  of  his  story.  The  altar  was  known  to  the 
author  as  still  extant  in  his  time. 


HOJULETICAL   AND    PRACTICAL. 

Israel  repented,  and  God's  compassion  renewed 
itself.  Manifold  as  nature  is  the  help  of  God.  It 
is  not  confined  to  one  method  ;  but  its  wonderi 
become  greater  as  Israel's  bondage  becomes  more 
abject.  It  was  a  great  thing  to  select  a  woman  to 
be  the  deliverer  of  Israel.  This  woman,  however, 
had  grown  up  in  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah ;  she  was  a 
prophetess  already,  accustomed  to  counsel  the  peo- 
ple. The  choice  of  Gideon  was  therefore  still 
more  extraordinary.  He  was  not  only  the  youngest 
in  the  least  family,  but  he  belonged  to  a  city  in 
which  the  heathen  had  for  the  most  part  remained. 
Idolatry  prevailed,  invading  even  his  father's  house. 
God  took  him  like  a  brand  from  the  fire,  to  make 
him  the  deliverer  of  his  people. 

So  God  converted  his  Apostle,  from  amidst  the 
multitude  of  enemies  and  their  plots,  on  the  way 
to  Damascus.  So  Luther  went  forth  from  his 
cloister  to  preach  the  gospel  of  freedom.  God  calls 
whoever  He  will,  and  no  school,  faculty,  or  coterie, 
limits  the  field  of  his  election. 

Starke  :  When  we  think  that  God  is  farthest 
from  us,  that  in  displeasure  He  has  entirely  left  us, 
then  with  his  grace  and  almighty  help  He  is  nearest 
to  us.  —  The  same:  Even  in  solitude  the  pious 
Christian  is  not  alone,  for  God  is  always  near 
him. 

God  does  not  err  in  his  calling.  Gideon  was 
the  right  man,  though  he  himself  did  not  believe 
it.  He  desires  a  sign,  not  from  unbelief,  but  hu- 
mility. He  who  thus  desires  a  miracle,  believes  in 
miracles.  He  desires  it  not  to  be  a  proof  of  God, 
but  of  himself.  To  him  the  censure  of  Jesus  does 
not  apply :  "  Except  ye  see  signs  and  wonders,  ye 
will  not  believe ; "  for  those  wished  them  as  grounds 
of  faith  in  Jesus,  Gideon  as  evidence  that  him- 
self was  the  right  man.  Gideon's  humility  was 
evidence  of  his  strength. — Hedinger:  Conceit 
and  pride  do  not  lead  man  to  God,  but  humility 
and  lowliness  do. 

Thus  Gideon  believed  the  angel  whom  he  beheld 
vanishing  toward  heaven  ;  the  Jews  did  not  believe 
Jesus,  when  He  wrought  miracles  and  rose  from 
the  dead.  But  Gideon's  eye  was  the  humility  with 
which  he  looked  at  himself.  When  Christians  do 
not  believe,  it  is  because  of  pride  which  does  not 
see  itself.  It  is  not  for  want  of  a  theophany  that 
many  do  not  believe  ;  for  all  have  seen  angels,  if 
their  heart  be  with  God.     "  For  the  angel  of  th« 

is  Peace,  t.  «.,  does  not  desire  to  destroy  Israel  in  his  wrath 
but  cherishes  thoughts  of  peace."  Cf.  Hengstenberg.  Dist 
on  Pint.  ii.  p.  34.  —  Ta.) 


CHAPTER   VI.   25-32. 


115 


Lord  encarapeth  round  about  them  that  fear  Him, 
and  celivereth  them"  (Vs.  xxxiv.  8). 

Starke  :  Even  the  strongest  faith  has  always 
something  of  weakness  in  it.  — Lisco  :  From  ver. 
14  Gideon  seems  already  to  hare  perceived  who  it 
was  that  spake  with  him.  His  answer  is  the  lan- 
guage not  so  much  of  unbelief  as  of  modesty.  — 
Geklach  :  His  prayer  was  not  dictated  by  unbe- 
lief, but  by  a  childlike,  reverential  acknowledgment 
of  the  weakness  of  his  faith,  as  in  the  case  of 
Abraham. 

[Bp.  Hall  (ver.  11)  :  What  shifts  nature  will 
make  to  live  !  0  that  we  could  be  so  careful  to 
lay  up  spiritual  food  for  our  souls,  out  of  the 
"each  of  those  spiritual  Midianites  !  we  could  not 


but  live  in  despite  of  all  adversaries.  —  The  same 
(ver.  13)  :  The  valiant  man  was  here  weak,  weak 
in  faith,  weak  in  discourse,  whilst  he  argues  God's 
absence  by  affliction,  his  presence  by  deliverances, 
and  the  unlikelihood  of  success  by  his  own  inabil- 
ity —  all  gross  inconsequences.  —  Scott  :  Talents 
suited  for  peculiar  services  may  for  a  time  be 
buried  in  obscurity;  but  in  due  season  the  Lord 
will  take  the  candle  from  "  under  the  bushel,"  and 
place  it  "on  a  candlestick,"  to  give  light  to  all 
around ;  and  that  time  must  be  waited  for,  by 
those  who  feel  their  hearts  glow  with  desires  of 
usefulness  which  at  present  they  have  no  oppor- 
tunity of  executing.  —  Tk.] 


Gideon  destroys  the  altar  of  Baal,  and  builds  one  to  Jehovah.     His  father,  Joash, 
defends  him  against  the  idolaters.     His  new  name,  Jerubbaal. 

Chapter  VI.  25-32. 

25  And  it  came  to  pass  the  same  [that]  night,  that  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  said  unto 
him,  Take  thy  father's  young  [ox]  bullock,  even  [and]  l  the  second  bullock  of 
seven  years  old,  and  throw  [pull]  down  the  altar  of  Baal  that  thy  father  hath,  and 

26  cut  down  the  grove  [Asherah]  that  is  by  [upon]  it :  And  build  an  altar  unto  the 
Lord  [Jehovah]  thy  God  upon  the  top  of  this  rock  [fortification],  in  the  ordered 
place,2  and  take  the  second  bullock,  and  offer  a  burnt-sacrifice  with  the  wood  of  the 

27  grove  [Asherah]  which  thou  shalt  cut  down.  Then  [And]  Gideon  took  ten  men 
of  his  servants,  and  did  as  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  had  said  unto  him :  and  so  it  was, 
because  he  feared  his  father's  household,  and  the  men  of  the  city,  that  he  could 

28  not  do  it  by  clay,  that  he  did  it  by  night.3  And  when  the  men  of  the  city  arose 
early  in  the  morning,  behold,  the  altar  of  Baal  was  cast  down,  and  the  grove 
[Asherah]  was  cut  down  that  was  by  [upon]  it,  and  the  second  bullock  was  offered 

29  upon  the  altar  that  ivas  built.  And  they  said  one  to  another,  who  hath  done  this 
thing  ?     And  when   [omit :  when]  they  inquired  and  asked  [searched],  [and]  they 

30  said,  Gideon  the  son  of  Joash  hath  done  this  thing.  Then  the  men  of  the  city 
said  unto  Joash.  Bring  out  thy  son,  that  he  may  die  :  because  he  hath  cast  down 
the  altar  of  Baal,  and  because  he  hath  cut  down  the  grove  [Asherah]  that  ivas  by 

31  [upon]  it.  And  Joash  said  unto  all  that  stood  against  [about]  him,  Will  ye  plead 
[contend]  for  Baal  ?  will  ye  save  him  ?  he  that  will  plead  [contendeth]  for  him,  let 
him  be  put  to  death  whilst  it  is  yet  morning ; 4  if  he  be  a  god,  let  him  plead  [con- 

32  tend]  for  himself,  because  one  [he]  hath  cast  down  his  altar.  Therefore  on  that 
day  he  [they]  called  him  Jerubbaal,  saying,  Let  Baal  plead  [contend]  against  him, 
because  he  hath  thrown  down  his  altar. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 


p.  Ver.  26.  —  Bertheau  and  Wordsworth  also  find  two  bullocks  in  the  text.  "  The  original  text,"  says  the  latte. , 
"  seeme  clearly  to  speak  of  two  bullocks,  and  the  ancient  versions  appear  to  distinguish  them  (see  Sept.,  Vulg.,  Syriae. 
Arabic)?'  De  Wette  and  Bunsen,  too,  render  ;r  and,*'  not  "even."  Keil  argues,  that  "if  God  had  commanded  Gideon 
to  take  two  bullocks,  He  would  surely  also  have  told  him  what  he  was  to  do  with  both."  But  does  He  not  tell  him 
plainly  enough  in  the  words,  "  and  pull  down  the  altar  of  Baal  ?  "     See  the  commentary,  below.  —  Tr.j 

[2  Ver.  26.  —  rO^l^S.  Our  author's  translation  of  this  word,  "  on  the  forward  edge,"  is  too  precarious  to  allow 
of  its  introduction  into  the  text.  It  probably  means  :  ''with  the  arrangement  of  wood '' (cf.  below).  On  the  use  of 
*£  in  this  sense,  see  Ges.  I>x.,  a.  v.,  B.  2,  a.  —  Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  27.  —The  E.  V.  is  singularly  awkward  here.  Dr.  Cassel :  "and  as,  on  account  of  the  house  of  his  father  and 
(he  men  of  the  city,  he  feared  to  do  it  by  day,  he  did  it  by  night." —  Tr.] 

[4  Ver.  31.  —  Dr  Cassel  translates  the  foregoing  clause  thus  :  t(  he  that  contendeth  for  him,  let  him  die!  W»it  fcU 
doming ;  "  etc.     Keil  interprets  similarly.  —  Tk.  J 


116 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


EXEGETICAL   AND   DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  25.  And  it  came  to  pass  that  night. 
"Ye  have  honored  false  gods  instead  of  the  eter- 
nal God,"  the  prophet  had  said  above,  "  and  there- 
fore are  come  under  the  yoke."  For  apart  from 
its  God,  the  maintenance  of  Israel's  nationality  is 
an  unnecessary  thing.  If  they  attach  themselves 
to  the  gods  of  the  nations,  they  must  also  wear 
their  fetters.  Only  when  they  believe  the  Eternal 
is  freedom  either  necessary  or  possible.  The  war 
against  the  oppressors,  must  begin  against  the  gods 
of  the  oppressors.  Gideon,  fully  convinced  of  the 
truth  of  Israel's  God,  cannot  summon  to  battle 
against  the  enemy,  while  an  altar  of  Baal  stands 
in  his  father's  own  village.  Israel's  watchword  in 
every  contest  is,  "  God  with  us ; "  but  before  that 
word  can  kindle  the  hearts  of  the  people,  it  must 
have  been  preceded  by  another  —  "  Down  with 
Baal ! "  This  truth  God  himself  enunciates  in 
the  valiant  soul  of  Gideon.  For  now,  being  wholly 
tilled  with  divine  tire,  he  will  delay  no  longer. 
But,  only  he  who  fears  not  Baal  will  find  confi- 
dence among  the  people.  The  vigorous  blows  of 
his  axe  against  the  Asherah  are  the  clearest  proofs 
of  his  own  faith.  Such  a  faith  kindles  faith.  Ac- 
cordingly, Gideon  must  begin  the  liberation  of 
Israel  in  Iris  own  house.  Whoever  will  be  truly 
free,  must  commence  with  himself  and  by  his  own 
lire-side  —  that  is  truth  for  all  ages. 

Take  the  ox-bulloek,  etc.  Under  divine  inspi- 
ration, Gideon  is  as  energetic  as  he  is  prudent. 
He  neither  delays,  nor  hastens  overmuch.  He 
chooses  night  for  what  he  has  to  do,  not  from  cow- 
ardice, but  to  insure  a  successful  issue.  By  day, 
an  outcry  and  contest  would  be  inevitable,  and 
would  terrify  the  undecided.  An  accomplished 
fact  makes  an  impression,  and  gives  courage.  His 
task  is  a  twofold  one :  he  must  first  tear  down, 
then  build  up.  The  abominations  of  Baal  must  be 
thrown  down.  The  altars  of  Baal,  as  the  superior 
sun-god,  were  located  on  heights  or  elevated  situa- 
tions. They  were  built  of  stone,  sometimes  also 
of  wood  or  earth  (2  Kgs.  xxiii.  15),  and  were  of 
considerable   massiveness.      Erected   upon   them, 

"  planted  "  (V®n  N?,  Deut.  xvi.  21 ),  stood  a  tree, 
or  trunk  of  a  tree,  covered  with  all  manner  of 
symbols.  This  was  consecrated  to  Astarte,  the 
fruitful,  subordinate  night-goddess.  Such  an  im- 
age was  that  of  Artemis  in  Ephesus,  black  (like 
the  earth),  fastened  to  the  ground,  and  full  about 
the  breasts,  to  symbolize  the  fostering  love  of  the 
earth.  In  other  places,  where  the  Greeks  met  with 
similar  figures,  Sparta,  Byzantium,  and  elsewhere 
(cf.  Gerhard,  Griech.  My'thol.  §  3.32,  4.  vol.  i.  p. 
343),  they  were  dedicated  to  Artemis  Orthia,  or 
Orthosia.     In  this  name  (opBis,  straight),  that  of 

the  Asherah  (from  "|E?M,  to  be  straight)  was  long 
since  recognized  (cf.  Zorn,  Biblioth.  Antiquar.,  p. 
383).  Asherah  was  the  straight  and  erect  idol  of 
Astarte  ;  the  symbol  of  her  sensual  attributes.  Its 
phallic  character  made  it  the  object  of  utter  abhor- 
rence and  detestation  to  the  pure  and  chaste  worship 
of  Jehovah.  And  in  truth  the  worship  at  Sparta 
(Paus.  iii.  16,  7)  did  not  differ  essentially  from 
that  on  Mt.  Carmel  (1  Kgs.  xviii.  28).  This  idol 
was  a  common  ornament  of  the   altars  of  Baal,1 

1  VbS  ~ltt?K  rnt£?Sn.  Hence  they  always  occur 
top  the?  of.  1  Kgs.  xiv.  23  ;'  xvi.  33 ;  2  Kgs.  xvii.  16  ;  xii. 
I ;  xiili.  16. 

J  [Wordsworth  :   "  Gideon,   though    not   a   priest,    was 


by  means  of  which  these  represented  the  worshif 
of  nature  in  its  completeness.  Hence  it  is,  thai 
we  find  Baal  and  Astarte  joined  together,  as  well 
as  Baal  and  Asherah.  Accordingly,  Asherah  and 
Astarte  are  not  indeed  altogether  identical,  as  was 
formerly  supposed  ;  but  neither  are  they,  as  Movert 
thought  (Phoeniz.  i.  561,  etc.),  different  divinities. 
Asherah  was  the  Astarte  Orthia,  the  image  which 
expressed  the  ideas  represented  by  the  goddess ; 
but  it  was  not,  and  need  not  be,  the  only  image  of 
the  goddess.  Without  adducing  here  the  many 
passages  of  Scripture  in  which  Asherah  and  Astarte 
occur,  the  foregoing  observations  may  suffice  to 
explain  every  one  of  them.  It  will  be  found,  upon 
reviewing  them,  that  while  persons  could  indeed 
worship  Astarte,  it  was  only  Asherah  which  they 
could  make  for  themselves,  and  again  destroy.  In 
form  and  idea,  Baal  and  Astarte  presented  the  per 
feet  contrast  to  the  living  and  creative  God.  Gid- 
eon, therefore,  if  he  is  to  build  up  Israel  anew, 
must  begin  with  the  overthrow  of  their  idols.  But 
this  was  not  so  slight  an  undertaking  as  to  be 
within  his  own  sole  powers  of  execution.  He 
needs  men  and  carts  for  the  purpose.  He  must 
wrench  the  altar  of  Baal  out  of  its  grooves,  and 
throw  it  down ;  tear  out  the  Asherah,  and  cut  it 
to  pieces.     In  their  place  (tins  is  expressed  by  the 

'TT'Ib  "this,"  of  ver.  26),  he  is  to  erect  an  altar  to 
the  Eternal  God.  For  this  he  cannot  use  the  pol- 
luted fragments  of  the  altar  of  Baal.  He  must 
bring  pure  earth  and  stones  with  him,  out  of  which 
to  construct  it-  Hence  he  uses  ten  servants  to 
assist  him,  and  a  cart. 

Take  the  ox-bullock  which  belongs  to  thy 
father,  etc.  The  altar  of  Baal  had  been  erected 
on  his  father's  estate.  The  guilt  of  his  father's 
house  must  be  first  atoned  for.  Therefore  his  cat- 
tle are  to  be  taken.     ~fitE>n  "IS,  ox-bullock,  is  not 

a  young  bullock,  and  does  not  answer  to  "^S  ]?. 
It  is  rather  the  first  bullock  of  the  herd,  the 
"leader;"  for  even  the  second,  being  seven  years 
old,  is  no  longer  young.  Hesiod  advises  agricul- 
turists to  provide  themselves  two  plough-bullocks 
of  nine  years  old  (  Works  and  Days,  447).  In 
Homer,  bullocks  of  five  years  are  offered  and 
slaughtered  (II.  ii.  403  ;  Odyss.  xix.  420).  Down 
to  the  present  day,  the  bullock  of  the  plain  of  Jez- 
reel  and  the  Kishon  surpasses,  in  size  and  strength, 
the  same  animal  in  the  southern  parts  of  the  land 
(cf.  Ritter,  xvi.  703).  Tins  first  bullock,  this  head 
of  the  herd,  answers  in  a  sense  to  the  head  of  the 
family,  which  is  Joash  ;  it  must  help  to  destroy 
the  altar  which  belongs  to  the  latter.  But  as 
Gideon  is  not  simply  to  destroy,  but  also  to  build 
up,  the  second  bullock  must  also  be  taken,  to  be 
offered  upon  the  new  altar,  in  a  fire  made  of  the 
wood  of  the  Asherah.  The  flames  for  which  the 
idol  must  furnish  the  material  —  and  we  may 
thence  infer  how  considerable  a  log  of  wood  it 
was,  —  must  serve  to  present  an  offering  to  the 
Eternal  God.2 

Vers.  26-29.   On  the  top  of  the  fortification, 

on  the  forward  edge,  Tll'SH  tPH")  7V  :  not  the 
rock,  near  which  God  first  appeared  to  Gideon. 
It  was  stated  at  the  outset,  that  Israel  made  them- 
selves grottoes,  caves,  and  fortifications  against  the 

made  a  priest  for  the  occasion  —  as  Manoah  afterwards  wat 
(ch.  xiii.  19) —  by  the  special  command  or  God,  who  showi 
his  divine  independence  and  sovereign  authority  by  making 
priests  of  whom  he  will,  and  by  ordering  altars  to  be  buiit 
where  he  will.     Cf.  Hengst..  Pentateuch,  ii.  48."  —  Tb  ] 


CHAPTER   VI.   25-32. 


in 


roemy.  Some  such  place  of  protection  and  de- 
fense we  are  here  to  understand  by  the  term  T157D. 
Upon  this,  the  altar  of  Baal,  the  helper  who  could 
not  help,  had  reared  itself.  In  its  place,  an  altar 
of  the  true  Helper,   the   Eternal   God,  was  now 

built,  and  placed  nD^l??32,  on  the  forward  edge. 
This  word  occurs  repeatedly  in  the  first  book  of 
Samuel,  in  the  sense  of  '■  battle-array."  It  an- 
swers to  the  Latin  aaes,  and  indicates  that  attitude 
of  armies  in  which  they  turn  their  offensive  sides 
toward  each  other  ;  so  that  we  are  told  ( 1  Sam.  xvii. 
21)   that  Israel  and  the  Philistines  had  arranged 

themselves  nDHSO  PrOp1?  nanjD.  Now,  as 
acies  came  to  signify  battle-array  because  of  the 

sharp  side  which  this  presented,  so  n3"^5?i  as 
here  used  of  the  fortification,  can  only  signify  its 
forward  edge.1  The  place  where  Gideon  had  to 
work  was  within  the  jurisdiction  of  Joash,  but  at 
some  distance  from  the  city,  since  otherwise  the 
inhabitants  would  scarcely  have  remained  ignorant 
of  his  proceedings  till  the  next  morning. 

Ver  30.  And  the  men  of  the  city  said  unto 
Joash.  Although  the  altar  belonged  to  Joash,  the 
people  of  the  city  nevertheless  think  themselves 
entitled  to  sit  in  judgment  on  the  insult  offered  to 
Baal.  Baal  worshippers  are  not  tolerant.  The 
disposition  of  Joash  however,  seems  even  before 
this  to  have  been  similar  to  that  of  Gideon.  For 
when  it  is  said  that  Gideon  feared  to  do  his  work 
by  day,  among  all  those  whom  he  considers,  his 
father  is  not  mentioned,  though  he  must  be  the 
most  directly  concerned.  The  same  inference  may- 
be drawn  from  the  energetic  and  ironical  answer 
which  he  gives  the  men  of  the  city.  There  is 
nothing  to  support  Bertheau's  conjecture  that 
Joash  held  the  office  of  a  judge.  He  is  the  head 
of  the  family  ;  as  such,  he  is  required  to  deliver  up 
Gideon,  guilty  of  crime  towards  Baal.  Joash  is 
not  merely  indisposed  to  do  this,  but  even  threatens 
to  use  violence  against  any  one  who  takes  the 
cause  of  Baal  upon  himself.  A  few  such  forcible 
words  were  enough  to  quiet  the  people  of  the  city. 
Israel  had  fallen  into  such  deep  torpidity  and  self- 
oblivion,  that  their  enemies  dared  to  demand  of  a 
father  the  life  of  his  son,  because  he  had  done  that 
which  it  was  the  duty  of  every  Israelite  to  do. 
The  first  energetic  resistance  changes  the  position 
of  parties,  and  puts  the  enemy  to  flight. 

Ver.  31.  And  Joash  said,  "Will  ye  contend  for 
Baal?  In  a  similar  manner,'2  Lucian  ridicules  the 
heathenism  of  his  day,  by  representing  Jupiter 
as  laughed  at  for  letting  the  sacriligious  thieves 
depart  from  Olympia,  untouched  by  his  thunder- 
bolts, although  they  had  cut  from  his  statue  the 
golden  locks  of  hairs,  each  of  which  weighed  six 
minas  (in  Jupiter  Tragoedus)-     It  lies  in  the  nature 

1  [Km.-  "  rO™"??'  'with  the  preparation  (Zuriis- 
ru/ig).'  The  explanation  of  this  word  is  doubtful.  Since 
|T32  is  used  (1  Kgs.  xv.  22)  with  3  of  the  building  ma- 
terial, Studer  and   Bertbeau   understand  HO"^^  of  the 

t  t-:  - 
materials  of  the  overthrown  Baal-altar,  out  of  which  Gideon 
was  to  build  the  altar  to  Jehovah  —  Studer  applying  the 
worl  more  particularly  to  the  stone  of  the  altar  itself. 
Bertheau  to  the  materials,  especially  the  pieces  of  wood, 
lying   on  the  altar,  ready  to  be  used  in  offering  sacrifices. 

Bat  they  are  certainly  wrong  ;  for  neither  does   r"0^3?72 

T  t  -:  - 
uean  building  material  or  pieces  of  wood,  nor  does  the 
iefinite  article,  which  here   precedes   it,  point  to  the   altar 

^f  Baal.     The  verb  7J"1!?  occurs  not  only  quite  frequently 


of  heathenism  to  identify  God  and  the  symbol 
which  represents  Him,  since  in  general  whatever 
testifies  of  God,  every  sensible  manifestation  of 
Deity,  is  made  Deity  itself  by  it.  Joash  ridicules 
the  idea  of  his  heathen  neighbors,  that  the  destruc- 
tion of  his  alter  is  an  insult  to  Baal.  On  the  prin- 
ciples of  heathenism,  Baal's  protection  of  his  altar 
or  the  contrary,  will  demonstrate  whether  he  is  oi 
is  not.  If  he  is  able  to  take  care  of  his  own  altar, 
Joash  mockingly  argues,  it  is  an  insult  for  another 
to  undertake  it  for  him.  In  this  case,  not  he  who 
injures,  but  he  who  would  defend  his  altar,  denies 
his  deity.     The  latter  first  deserves  to  die.     Many 

expositors  have  connected  "IpHH  "T3J,  "  till  morn- 
ing," with  nHS'P,  "let  him  die,"  which  is  against 
the  sense  of  Joash's  speech.  As  to  the  destroyer 
of  the  altar,  he  says,  we  know  not  yet  whether  he 
has  deserved  death ;  wait  till  morning,  and  let  us 
see  whether  Baal  himself  will  do  anything.  But 
he  who  would  take  Baal's  place,  and  put  the  othei 
to  death,  he  deserves  punishment  at  once ;  for  he 
denies  that  Baal  has  any  power  at  all,  and  by  con- 
sequence  that  he  exists.  Wait  till  morning,  if  he 
be  a  god,  he  will  contend  for  himself,  because 
he  hath  cast  down  his  altar.  Joash  denies  that 
the  altar  belonged  to  him,  although  ver.  25  states 
that  it  did.  The  altar,  he  says,  belongs  to  its  god : 
let  him  see  to  it.  The  result  of  these  words  must 
have  been,  to  make  it  evident  to  the  men  of  the 
city  that  Joash  and  his  house  would  have  nothing 
more  to  do  with  Baal.  For  this  they  knew  full 
well,  that  their  Baal  would  do  nothing  :o  Gideon. 
It  is  one  af  the  characteristic  illusions  of  heathen- 
ism in  a.l  ages,  that  it  does  not  itself  believe  in 
that  for  which  it  spends  its  zeal. 

Ver.  32.  And  at  that  time  they  named  him 
Jerubbaal,  that  is,  Baal  will  contend  with  him, 
for  he  hath  thrown  down  his  altar.  Why  ex- 
positors have  not  been  content  with  this  significant 
explanation,  it  is  impossible  to  see.3  It  sets  forth 
the  utter  impotence  of  Baal,  and  the  mockery 
which  it  excited.  Had  Gideon  been  named  "  Con- 
tender with  Baal,"  it  would  have  implied  the  exist- 
ence of  Baal.  But  if  he  was  called,  "  Baal  will 
contend  with  him,  avenge  himself  on  him,"  and 
thus  by  his  life,  presence,  and  prosperity,  strikingly 
manifested  the  impotence  of  the  idol-god,  who 
could  not  take  vengeance  on  him,  then  his  name 
itself  was  full  of  the  triumph  of  the  Israelitish 
spirit  over  its  opponents.  Baal  can  do  nothing. 
Baal  loill  do  nothing,  when  his  altars  are  ovet 
thrown.  Baal  is  not:  Israel  has  no  occasion  to 
fear.  The  superstition  that  he  will  avenge  him- 
self on  his  enemies,  is  idle.  Of  that,  Jerubbaal 
affords  living  proof.  In  vain  did  Baal's  servants 
wait  for  vengeance  to  overtake  Gideon  —  it  came 
not ;  the  hero  only  becomes  greater  and  more  tri- 

of  the  arrangement  of  the  wood  upon  the  altar  (Gen.  xxii. 
9 ;  Lev.  i.  7,  and  elsewhere),  but  also  of  the  preparation  ol 
the  altar   for  the   sacrifice   (Num.    xxiii.  4).      Accordingly, 

7"T^-**T^  can   scarcely    be    understood  otherwise    than  ol 

T  t  -:  - 
the  preparation  of  the  altar  to  be  built  for  the  sacrificial 
action,  in  the  sense:  f  Build  the  altar  with  the  preparation 
(equipment)  required  for  the  sacrifice  "  According  to  what 
follows,  this  preparation  consisted  in  piling  up  the  wood  ol 
the  Asherah  on  the  altar  to  consume  the  burnt-offering  ol 
Gideon."— Tr] 

2  The  same  idea  underlies  the  Jewish  legends  ot  Abrft 
ham's  destruction  of  the  idols  in  his  father's  house.  Cf 
Beer,  Leben  Abraham^,  Leipzig,  1869.  p.  10. 

8  geil  has  come  back  to  it. 


!18 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


Bmphant.  The  name  is  therefore  of  greater  eth- 
ical significance,  than  has  been  generally  supposed. 
This  fact  secured  its  perpetuation  and  popular  use. 
Even  believers  in  the  eternal  God  are  deeply  im- 
bued with  superstitious  fear  of  Baal,  which  forbids 
them  to  do  anything  against  him.  How  idle  this 
fear  is,  Gideon  shows.  Samuel  in  his  farewell  ad- 
dress speaks  of  Gideon  as  Jerubbaal  (1  Sam.  xii. 
11 ) ;  while  Joab,  speaking  of  Abimelech,  calls  him 

"son of  Jerubbosheth"(2  Sam.  xi.  21).  J""lt273  is  a 
term  of  reproach  for  Baal  (Hos.  ix.  10). '  Any 
connection  between  the  name  Jerubbaal  and  that 
of  a  god  Jaribolos,  discovered  on  Palmyrene  in- 
scriptions, is  not  to  be  thought  of.  First,  for  the 
self-evident  reason,  that  no  heathen  god  can  possi- 
bly be  called  Jerubbaal ;  and  secondly,  because  the 
like-sounding  Jar   can   be  better  explained  from 

T]^>  the  moon,  thus  suggesting  a  moon-baal  (cf. 
Corpus  Insc.  Gru-c.  iii.  n.  4502,  etc. ;  Rifter,  xvii. 
1531,  etc.).    It  is  interesting  to  notice  that  Gideon's 

proper  name,  'pyjS,  appropriately  expresses  the 

act  with  which  lie  began  his  career.  I?}2  is  equiv- 
alent to  the  Latin  caedere,  to  fell.  Deut.  vii.  5 
says  :   "  Their  altars  ye  shall  throw  down 

their  asherahs  ye  shall  fell  (I^V^P,  cf.  Deut.  xii. 
3).  The  same  word  is  used  (2  Chron.  xiv.  2 ;  xxxi. 
1 )  of  the  felling  of  the  Asherah,  and  Isa.  ix.  9,  of 
the  felling  of  trees.  Gideon,  therefore,  is  the 
Feller,  Casor  (Caesar). 


HOMILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

After  the  miracle  of  his  election,  Gideon  enters 
on  his  calling.  Othniel  begins  his  official  career 
in  battle,  Gideon  in  his  own  house.  He  must  test 
at  home  his  courage  against  foes  abroad.  Before 
he  can  proclaim  the  call  of  God  against  the  ene- 
mies of  Israel,  who  are  inflicted  on  account  of  the 
prevalent  idolatry,  he  must  throw  down  the  altar 
of  Baal  in  his  father's  house.  The  most  difficult 
battle  is  to  be  fought  first.  Nearest  neighbors  are 
the  worst  adversaries.  But  he  dares  it  because  he 
believes  God,  and  wins.  So,  when  preachers  of 
the  gospel  reap  no  fruit  and  gain  no  victory,  it  is 
often  because  they  have  not  yet  overthrown  the 
altars  in  their  own  houses.  The  road  to  the  hearts 
of  the  congregation,  is  over  the  ruins  of  the  min- 
ister's own  Baal.  —  Starke:  Christian  friend, 
thou  also  hast  a  Baal  in  thine  own  heart,  namely, 
evil  concupiscence.  Wilt  thou  please  the  Lord, 
first  tear  that  idol  down. 

But  Gideon  must  not  merely  tear  down,  but 
also  build  up ;  not  only  destroy  the  old  altar,  but 
also  sacrifice  on  the  new.  Tearing  down  is  of 
itself  no  proof  of  devotion  ;  for  an  enemy's  enemy 
is  not  always  a  friend.  The  spirit  that  onlv  de- 
nies, is  an  evil  spirit.  Divine  truth  is  positive. 
Building  involves  confession;  hence,  to  build  up 
(edify)  is  to  proclaim  our  confession  and  to  preach 
the  gospel  of  Him  who  is  Yea  and  Amen.  So 
did  the  Apostle  not  merely  undermine  the  idolatry 
of  Diana,  but  build  up  the  church  in  Ephesus. 
Boniface,  the  Apostle  of  the  Germans,  not  only 
cut  down  the  oaks  of  heathenism,  but  founded 
churches.  All  churches  are  Gideon-altars,  dedi- 
cated to  Him  who  overthrew  death,  that  He  might 
bnild  up  the  New  Jerusalem.  —  Starke  :  He  who 

1  On  the  names  Ishbosheth  and  Mephibosheth,  compare 
tor  the  present  my  article  on  lahbosheth  in  Herzog's  foal- 


would  truly  reform,  must  not  only  abolish,  bo 
put  something  better  in  its  place. 

Gideon's  sacrifice  was  to  be  consumed  by  the. 
wood  of  the  idol-image.  The  sole  use  which  can 
be  made  of  wooden  gods,  is  to  kindle  a  sacrifice  to 
the  true  God.  The  wood  was  not  unholy,  liut 
only  the  heart  that  fashioned  it  into  an  idol-image. 
The  mountains  on  which  the  people  worshipped 
were  not  unholy,  but  only  the  people  who  erected 
idols  upon  them.  All  sacrificial  flames  arise  from 
the  wood  of  idols  previously  worshipped.  So  the 
Apostle  consumed  his  zeal  as  persecutor  in  the 
burning  zeal  of  love.  When  the  heart  burns  with 
longings  after  its  Saviour,  the  flames  consume  the 
worldly  idols  which  it  formerly  served.  When 
prayer  rises  like  the  smoke  of  sacrifice,  it  springs 
from  penitence  in  which  old  sins  are  burned  to 
ashes. 

Gideon  is  obedient  to  every  direction,  and  is 
crowned  with  success.  Notwithstanding  apparent 
danger,  obedience  to  God  conducts  only  to  happy 
issues.  The  most  painful  injunction  is  laid  on 
Abraham  ;  he  obeys,  and  it  turns  to  salvation. 
The  enemies  seek  to  slay  Gideon  ;  but  they  are 
sent  home  with  derision.  Gideon  not  only  threw 
down  the  altar  in  his  father's  house,  but  also  won 
his  father's  heart  for  God.  So,  confession  of  Christ 
often  draws  after  it  the  hearts  of  parents.  It  is 
salvation,  even  if  the  first  be  last.  However  late, 
if  at  last  men  only  come  to  God !  —  Lisco  :  The 
father  had  evidently  derived  new  courage  from  his 
son's  bold  exploit  of  faith,  and  declares  war  to  the 
idolaters,  if  they  touch  his  son.  —  Gereach  :  The 
hold  deed  of  the  son  inspired  the  father  also  with 
new  faith  and  courage.  Hence,  in  this  strife, 
Joash  dared  to  judge  as  faith  demanded. 

And  Gideon  was  called  Jerubbaal.  The  hero  is 
the  wonderful  type  of  the  militant  church  :  militant, 
that  is,  against  unbelief,  not  engaged  in  internal 
warfare.  His  name  proclaimed  that  Baal  is  noth- 
ing and  can  do  nothing;  but  that  God's  word  is 
irresistable.  Hence,  it  is  a  symbol  of  encourage- 
ment for  all  who  confess  the  truth.  He  who  fears 
and  hesitates,  does  not  love ;  but  for  him  who  has 
courage,  Baal  is  vanished.  Gideon  threw  down 
his  altar,  and  built  another  for  God,  not  for  the 
stones'  sake,  but  for  Israel's  benefit.  Every  Chris- 
tian is  a  Jerubbaal,  so  long  as  instead  of  self- 
righteousness,  he  gives  a  place  in  his  heart  to  the 
Cross.  Thus,  many  in  our  days,  who  have  more 
fear  of  man  than  courage  in  God.  are  put  to  shame 
by  Jerubbaal.  They  exercise  discretion,  regard 
their  position,  look  to  their  income,  defer  to  supe- 
riors, and  wish  to  please  all,  —  but  only  he  who 
seeks  to  please  God  alone,  loses  nothing  and  gains 
all.  —  Starke  :  As  names  given  to  men  in  mem- 
ory of  their  good  deeds  are  an  honor  to  them,  so  to 
their  adversaries  they  are  a  disgrace.  —  Gerlach  : 
Henceforth  the  life  and  well-being  of  Gideon  be- 
came an  actual  proof  of  the  nothingness  of  idol- 
atry ;  hence  he  receives  the  name  Jerubbaal  from 
the  mouth  of  his  father. 

[Bp.  Hall  :  The  wood  of  Baal's  grove  must  be 
used  to  burn  a  sacrifice  unto  God.  When  it  was 
once  cut  down,  God's  detestation  and  their  danger 
ceased.  The  good  creatures  of  God  that  have  been 
profaned  to  idolatry,  may,  in  a  change  of  their  use, 
be  employed  to  the"  holy  service  of  their  Maker.  — 
Wordsworth  :  The  Parthenons  and  Pantheons 
of  heathen  antiquity  have  been  consecrated  into 
Basilicas  and  Churches  of  Christ.  —  Hexrt  :  Gid- 

encyhl.  vii-  88,  where,  however,  the  printer  has  erroneous!* 

pat  bv2o  np  for  b^2  :r-in. 


CHAPTER   VI.   33-40. 


118 


eon,  as  a  type  of  Christ,  must  first  save  his  people 
from  their  sins,  then  from  their  enemies.  —  The 
iame  :  It  is  good  to  appear  for  God  when  we  are 


called  to  it,  though  there  be  few  or  none  to  second 
us,  because  God  can  incline  the  hearts  of  these  to 
stand  by  us,  from  whom  we  little  expect  it.  — Tb. 


The  Midianite  marauders  being  encamped  in  the  Plain  of  Jezreel,  the  Spirit  of  Jeho- 
vah takes  possession  of  Gideon.      The  double  sign  of  the  fleece. 

Chapter  VI.  33-40. 

33  Then  [And]  all  the  Midianites,  and  the  Amalekites,  and  the  children  [sons]  of 
the   east  were  gathered  together,  and  went  over,  and  pitched  [encamped]  in  the 

34  valley  [plain]  of  Jezreel.     But  [And]  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  came  upon 

35  Gideon,  and  he  blew  a  [the]  trumpet ;  and  Abi-ezer  was  gathered  after  him.     And 
he   sent  messengers  throughout  all  Manasseh  ;  who  also  was  gathered  after  him 
and  he  sent  messengers  unto  Asher.  and  unto  Zebulun.  and  unto  NaphtaJi ;  ana 

36  they  came  up  to  meet  them.1     And  Gideon  said  unto  God,  If  thou  wilt  save  Israel 

37  by  my  hand,  as  thou  hast  said.  Behold.  I  will  [omit  :  will]  put  a  fleece  of  wool  in 
the  [threshing]  floor:  and  if  the  dew  [shall]  be  on  the  fleece  only,  and  it  be  dry 
upon  all  the  earth  [ground]  besides,  then  shall  I  know  that  thou  wilt  save  Israel  by 

38  my  hand,  as  thou  hast  said.  And  it  was  so :  for  [and  when]  he  rose  up  early  on 
the  morrow,  and  [he]  thrust  [pressed  -]  the  fleece  together,  and  wringed2  the  [omit : 

39  the]  dew  out  of  the  fleece,  a  [the 3]  bowl-full  of  water.  And  Gideon  said  unto  God, 
Let  not  thine  anger  be  hot  [kindled]  against  me,  and  I  will  speak  but  this  once : 
let  me  prove  [try],  I  pray  thee,  but  this  once  with  the  fleece ;  let  it  now  be  dry 

40  only  upon  the  fleece,  and  upon  all  the  ground  let  there  be  dew.  And  God  did  so 
that  night :  for  [and]  it  was  dry  upon  the  fleece  only,  and  there  was  dew  on  all  the 
ground. 

TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

1 1  Ver.  35.  —  CHS^n  /    "  to  meet  them,"'  i.  *..  Gideon  aud  the  Manassites  alreadv  in  the  field.     Dr.  Cassel  (De  Wette, 
t     t  ' :  •  ' 
nlflo)  substitutes  "  him."'     The  LXX.  change  the  number  at  the  other  end  of  the  sentence,  probably  because  they  thought 

that  the  mountaineers  of  Asher  and  Naphtali,  descending  into  the  plain,  did  not  make  a  good  subject  for  77^37.  to  go 
up,  and  render:  *o'i  ive'^i)  eit  mivdvrriaiv  airiK.  As  to  what  may  be  called  the  "  military  ''  meaning  of  HjI',  cf.  the 
Com.  on  ch.  i.  1,  p.  26.  —  Te.] 

p  Ver.  38.  —  The  words  rendered  "  thrust  together  "  and  "  wringed  "  by  the  E.  V.,  are  ~ !TS1  (from  -|!ft)  and  \"D** 
(from  H"Q).  Dr.  Cassel  translates  the  first  by  "  wringing."'  the  second  by  "  pressing."'  The  difference  between  them 
seems  to  be  slight,  if  any.  In  the  test,  one  clause  expresses  the  action,  the  other  the  result.  The  primary  idea  ot  "lift, 
according  to  Gesenius,  is  "  to  straiten,  to  bring  into  a  narrow  compass  ; "  that  of  HUO.  "  to  suck."'  The  action  ol 
wringing,  though  likely  enough  to  be  used  by  Gideon,  is  not  expressed  by  either  term.  However,  it  lies  nearer  ~fflT 
than    71VT3.      De  Wette:  Er  drur.ktt ■  die  Wolle  aut,  und  pressle  Tliau  aus  der  Schvr,  etc.  —  Tr.) 

T  T 

[8  Ver.  38.  —  725H,  tf '/""  bowl,"  namely,  the  one  he  used  to  receive  the  water.  On  the  "  bowl,"  compare  our  au 
thcr's  remarks  on  cb.  v.  25.  — Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL   AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  33-35.  It  was  high  time  that  a  new  spirit 
oe3tirred  itself  in  Israel.  The  Bedouin  hordes 
already  pressed  forward  again  from  the  desert  re- 
gions beyond  the  Jordan,  and  were  settling  down, 
Ako  a  heavy  cloud,  on  the  plain  of  Jezreel.  Gid- 
eon, by  his  bold  deed  against  Baal,  and  because 
the  idol-god  did  nothing  whatever  to  avenge  the 
Insult  to  its  altar,  had  acquired  authority  and  dis- 
tinction among  his   people.     As  now  the  enemy 


who  oppressed  and  plundered  Israel  was  near,  the 
Spirit  of  God  filled  him,  literally,  "  put  him  on.'" 
What  he  had  done  against  the  altar  of  Baal  in  his 
father's  house,  that  he  would  attempt  against  the 
enemy  in  the  open  field.  He  sounds  the  trumpet 
on  the  mountains.  Though  the  youngest  in  his 
family,  and  that  the  least  in  Manasseh,  the  people 
obeyed  his  call,  and  ranged  themselves  under  him 

(V^nS^  —  such  power  is  there  in  one  courageous 
deed,  in  the  vigorous  resolution  of  one  man  in  a 


120 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


servile  age.  Even  Asher,  who  had  held  back  from 
Barak,  furnished  men.  Xor  were  the  brave  sons 
of  Zebulun  and  Naphtali  wanting  on  this  occasion 
In  a  short  time  Gideon  stood  at  the  head  of  a  rot 
inconsiderable  army. 

Ver.  36.  And  Gideon  said  unto  God.  The 
success  thus  far  enjoyed  by  Gideon,  has  not  lifted 
him  up.  He  cannot  yet  believe  that  he  is  called  to 
conduct  so  great  an  undertaking.  He  is  aware 
also  of  the  dangers  to  which  he  exposes  his  house 
and  country.  True,  the  divine  manifestation  which 
roused  his  soul,  is  still  acting  on  him.  But  time, 
even  a  few  eventful  days,  envelops  such  memories 
in  shadowy  dimness.  In  his  humility,  he  is  seized 
by  a  longing  for  renewed  certainty.  He  desires  to 
be  assured,  whether  it  was  indeed  destined  for  him 
to  become  the  deliverer.  He  has  recourse  to  no 
superstitious  use  of  the  lot.  He  turns  in  prayer  to 
the  God  who  has  already  shown  his  wonders  to 
him,  and  who,  as  angel,  has  conversed  with  him. 
Now,  as  in  ver.  20.  where  the  angel  manifests  his 
supernatural  character,  the  narrator  used  Elohim, 
with  the  article,  because  from  Jehovah  alone,  who 
is  the  true  Elohim,  the  only  one  to  whom  this  name 
justly  belongs,  angels  proceed  ;  so  here  again,  when 
Gideon  asks  for  a  new  sign,  he  makes  him  pray  to 
"  the  Elohim,"  and  continues  to  employ  this  term 
as  long  as  he  speaks  of  the  miracle. 

Vers.  37-40.  Behold,  I  put  a  fleece  of  wool  in 
the  threshing-floor.  The  sign  he  asks  for  is  such 
as  would  naturally  suggest  itself  to  a  person  in 
rural  life.  The  holy  land  is  favored  with  heavy, 
fertilizing  dews,  which  impart  to  its  fields  that 
beautiful  and  juicy  verdure,  by  which  it  forms  so 
grateful  a  contrast  with  the  dry  and  dewless  steppes 
on  which  nothing  but  the  palm  grows  (cf.  Ritter, 
xv.  157;  xvi.  42,  etc.  [Gage's  Transl.  ii.  164]). 
Wool,  spread  on  the  open  threshing-floor,  especially 
attracts  the  dew.  Gideon  proposes  to  consider  it  a 
divine  affirmative  sign,  if  only  the  wool  absorb 
dew,  while  the  ground  around  be  dry.  It  takes 
place.     He   finds   the   wool  wet;    after   wringing 

C^!*?>  from  "AT  =  "flS)    the  fleece,  and  pressing 

it  (VEE!  from  TOa  =  VSn),  he  can  fill  a  whole 
bowl  full  with  the  water ;  the  ground  round  about 
is  dry.  Though  very  remarkable,  he  thinks  never- 
theless, that  it  mav  possibly  be  explained  on  nat- 
ural principles.  Perhaps  the  dew,  already  dried 
up  from  the  ground,  was  only  longer  retained  by 
the  fleece.  In  his  humility  and  necessity  for  assur- 
ance, and  in  the  purity  of  his  conscience,  which  is 
known  to  God,  he  ventures  once  more  to  appeal  to 
God.  If  now  the  reverse  were  to  take  place,  leav- 
ing the  wool  dry  and  the  ground  wet,  there  could 
be  no  doubt  that  God  had  wrought  a  miracle  No 
other  explanation  would  be  possible.  This  also 
comes  to  pass,  and  Gideon  knows  now  beyond  all 
doubt,  that  God  is  with  him.  The  naivete  of  an 
uncommon  depth  of  thought  reveals  itself  in  this 
choice  of  a  sign  for  which  the  hero  asks.  Faith  in 
God's  omnipotence  lies  at  its  base.  Such  a  request 
could  only  be  made  by  one  who  knew  that  the 
whole  creation  was  in  the  hands  of  God.  Relying 
an  the  grace  and  power  of  God,  he  casts  lots  with 
the  independent  laws  of  nature.     The  childlike 


faith  which  animates  him,  sounds  the  depths  of 
an  unfathomable  wisdom.  Hence,  in  the  ancient 
church,  his  miraculous  sign  became  the  tvpe  of  thfl 
highest  and  most  wonderful  miracle  known  to  the 
church,  the  birth  of  Jesus  from  the  Virgin  Mary. 
Origen  already  speaks  of  the  advent  of  the  Son  of 
God  as  the  fall  of  the  divine  dew  The  develop- 
ment of  this  type  in  pictures  and  customs,  I  have 
elsewhere  attempted  to  trace,  whither  I  must  here 
refer  the  reader  (  WeUmachten,  p.  248,  etc.). 

HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

Geelach  :  Gideon  does  not  "  put  on  "  the  Spirit 
of  the  Lord,  but  the  Spirit  puts  him  on.  He  clothes 
him,  as  with  a  suit  of  armor,  so  that  in  his  strength 
he  becomes  invulnerable,  invincible. 

[Bp.  Hall  :  Of  all  the  instruments  that  God  did 
use  in  so  great  a  work,  I  find  none  so  weak  as 
Gideon,  who  yet  of  all  others  was  styled  valiant. 
The  same  :  The  former  miracle  was  strong  enough 
to  carry  Gideon  through  his  first  exploit  of  ruin- 
ating the  idolatrous  grove  and  altar ;  but  now, 
when  he  saw  the  swarm  of  the  Midianites  and 
Amalekites  about  his  ears,  he  calls  for  new  aid ; 
and,  not  trusting  to  the  Abiezrites,  and  his  other 
thousands  of  Israel,  he  runs  to  God  for  a  further 
assurance  of  victory.  The  refuge  was  good,  but 
the  manner  of  seeking  it  savors  of  distrust.  There 
is  nothing  more  easy  than  to  be  valiant  when  no 
peril  appeareth  ;  but  when  evils  assail  us  upon 
equal  terms,  it  is  hard,  and  commendable,  not  to 
be  dismayed.  If  God  had  made  that  proclamation 
now,  which  afterwards  was  commanded  to  be  made 
by  Gideon,  "Let  the  timorous  depart,"  I  doubt 
whether  Israel  had  not  wanted  a  guide :  yet  how 
willing  is  the  Almighty  to  satify  our  weak  desires! 
What  tasks  is  He  content  to  be  set  by  our  infirm- 
ity! —  Keil  :  Gideon's  prayer  for  a  sign  sprang 
not  from  want  of  faith  in  God's  promise  of  vic- 
tory, but  from  the  weakness  of  the  flesh,  which 
paralyzes  the  faith  and  energy  of  the  spirit,  and 
often  makes  the  servants  of  God  so  anxious  and 
timorous  that  God  must  assist  them  by  miracles. 
Gideon  knew  himself  and  his  own  strength,  and 
that  for  victory  over  the  enemy  this  would  not 
suffice.  —  Scott  :  Even  they  who  have  the  Spirit 
of  God,  and  by  the  trumpet  of  the  gospel  call 
others  to  the  conflict,  cannot  always  keep  out  dis- 
quieting fears,  in  circumstances  of  peculiar  dan- 
ger and  difficulty.  In  this  struggle  against  invol- 
untary unbelief,  the  Lord  himself,  the  Author  and 
Finisher  of  his  people's  faith,  is  their  refuge;  to 
Him  they  make  application,  and  He  will  help 
them ;  and  when  they  are  encouraged,  they  will 
lie  enabled  to  strengthen  their  brethren.  —  Bush  : 
The  result  went,  1.  To  illustrate  the  divine  conde- 
scension. God,  instead  of  being  offended  with  his 
servant,  kindly  acceded  to  his  request.  A  fellow 
creature  who  had  given  such  solemn  promises, 
would  have  been   quite  indignant  at  finding  his 

veracity  seemingly  called  in  question 

2.  To  show  the  efficacy  of  prayer.  It  was  prayer 
that  prevailed  in  this  instance.  With  great  hn 
mility  and  much  tenderness  of  spirit,  Gidom  b» 
sought  the  divine  interposition.  —  Th  ] 


CHAPTER  VTI.   1-8. 


121 


Gideon   in  the  field. 


His  numerous  army  reduced,  by  divinely  prescribed  tests,  t» 
three  hundred  men. 


Chapter  VII.   1-8. 

1  Then  [And]  Jei  ubbaal  (who  is  Gideon)  and  all  the  people  that  were  with  him, 
rose  up  early  and  pitched  [encamped]  beside  the  well  of  Harod  [near  En-Harod]  : 
so  that  [and]  the  host  [camp]  of  the  Midianites  were  [was]  on  the  north  side  of 

2  them  by  the  hill  of  Moreh,  in  the  valley.1  And  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  said  unto 
Gideon,  The  people  that  are  with  thee  are  too  many  for  me  to  give  the  Midianites 
into  their  hands,  lest  Israel  vaunt  themselves  against  me,  saying,  Mine  own  hand 

3  hath  saved  me.  Now  therefore  go  to,  proclaim  in  the  ears  of  the  people,  saying, 
Whosoever  is  fearful  and  afraid,  let  him  return  and  depart  early  [turn  away]  from 
Mount  Gilead.     And  there  returned  of  the  people  twenty  and  two  thousand  ;  and 

4  there  remained  ten  thousand.  And  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  said  unto  Gideon,  The  peo- 
ple are  yet  too  many  ;  bring  them  down  unto  the  water,  and  I  will  try  them  for  thee 
there  ;  and  it  shall  be  that  of  whom  I  say  unto  thee,  This  [one]  shall  go  with  thee, 
the  same  shall  go  with  thee  ;  and  of  whomsoever  I  say  unto  thee,  This  [one]  shall 

>  not  go  with  thee,  the  same  shall  not  go.  So  he  brought  down  the  people  unto  the 
water  :  and  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  said  unto  Gideon ;  Every  one  that  lappeth  of  the 
water  with  his  tongue  as  a  dog  lappeth,  him  shalt  thou  set  by  himself ;  likewise  every 

6  one  that  boweth  down  upon  his  knees  to  drink.  And  the  number  of  them  that 
lapped,  putting  their  hand  to  their  mouth,  were  three  hundred  men  :  but  all  the  rest 

7  of  the  people  bowed  down  upon  their  knees  to  drink  water.  And  the  Lord  [Jeho- 
vah] said  unto  Gideon,  By  the  three  hundred  men  that  lapped  will  I  save  you,  and 
deliver  the  Midianites  into  thine  hand  :  and  let  all  the  other  people  go  every  man 

8  unto  his  place.  So  the  people  [And  they]  took  [the]  victuals  [from  the  people] 
in  their  hand,  and  their  trumpets  ; 2  and  he  sent  all  the  rest  of  Israel  every  man 
unto  his  tent,  and  retained  those  three  hundred  men.  And  the  host  [camp]  of 
Midian  was  beneath  him  in  the  valley. 

TEXTDAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  1.  —  Dr.  Cassel,  taking  ^7  in  the  last  clause  of  this  Terse  (and  also  in  ver.  8)  as  if  it  were  V3C^,  renders 
thus :  f(  And  he  had  the  camp  of  Midian  before  him  in  the  valley,  to  the  north  of  the  hill  Moreh."  The  E.  V.  is  more 
correct.  Literally  rendered,  the  clause  says  that  "the  camp  of  Midian  was  to  him  (Gideon)  on  the  north,  at  OD.  cf. 
Ges.  Lex.  s.  v.,  3,  h)  the  hill  of  Moreh,  in  the  valley.'1  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  8.  —  On  the  rendering  of  this  clause,  see  the  commentary  below.  Keil  translates  similarly  ("  of  the  people," 
Instead  of  "from  the  people  "),aud  remarks:  "  C3?rT  cannot  be  subject,  partly  on  account  of  the  sense  —  for  the  three 
hundred  who  are  without  doubt  the  subject,  cf.  ver   16,  cannot  be  called    C3?i"T  in  distinction  of  ^K"1C£?^    tL^K     /3 

T    T  ••  T   :     *  T 

-partly  also  on  account  of  the  H~T^""jHS.  which  would  then,  against  the  rule,  be  without  the  article,  cf.  Ges.  Gram. 
117,  2.     Rather  read  C.VT1   illl'TIS,  as  Sept.  and  Targum."     So  also  Bertheau.  —  Te.] 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  1.  And  they  encamped  near  En  Harod. 
The  great  probability  that  Ophrah  is  to  be  sought 
somewhere  to  the  northwest  of  Jczreel  (the  modern 
Zerin),  has  already  been  indicated  above.  The 
oattle  also  must  be  located  in  the  same  region,  as 
appears  from  the  course  of  the  flight,  related  farther 
oi/.  The  camp  of  Midian  was  in  the  valley,  to  the 
north  of  a  hill.  Now,  since  we  are  told  that  Gideon's 
;amp  was  on  a  hill  (ver.  4),  below  which,  and  north 
of  another,  Midian  was  encamped,  it  is  evident 
that  Gideon  occupied  a  position  north  of  Midian, 
and  had  that  part  of  the  plain  of  Jezrecl  in  which 
the  enemy  lay,  below  him,  towards  the  south.  The 
leight  near  which  the  hostile  army  was  posted,  is 


called  the  Hill  Moreh.  Moreh  (n"TlO,  from  fT^), 
signifies  indicator,  pointer,  overseer  and  teacher. 
The  mountain  must  have  commanded  a  free  view 
of  the  valley.  This  applies  exactly  to  the  Tell  el 
Mutsellim,  described  by  Robinson  (Bill.  Res.  iii. 
117|.  He  says  :  "  The  prospect  from  the  Tell  is  a 
noble  one,  embracing  the  whole  of  the  glorious 
plain,  than  which  there  is  not  a  richer  upon  earth. 
It  was  now  extensively  covered  with  fields  of  grain  ; 
with  many  tracts  of  grass,  like  meadows;  .  .  . 
Zerin  (Jezreel)  ipas  distinctly  in  view,  bearing 
S.  74°  E."  To  this  must  be  added  that  the 
Arabic  Mutsellim  has  essentially  the  same  mean 
ing  as  Moreh,  namely,  overseer,  district-governor, 
etc.     The  peculiar  position  of  the  Tell  has  probablj 


122 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


given  it  the  same  kind  and  degree  of  importance  in 
all  ages.  A  little  north  of  Tell  Mutsellim,  Robin- 
eon's  map  has  a  Tell  Kireh,  which  may  mark  the 
position  of  Gideon ;  for  that  must  have  been  very 
near  and  not  high,  since  Gideon  could  descend  from 
it  and  hurry  back  in  a  brief  space  of  the  same  night. 
It  may  be  suggested,  at  least,  that  Kireh  has  some 
similarity  of  sound  with  Charod  (Harod).1 

Ver.  2.  The  people  that  are  with  thee  are  too 
many.  Victory  over  Midian,  and  deliverance  from 
their  yoke,  would  avail  Israel  nothing,  if  they  did 
not  g'ain  the  tirm  conviction  that  God  is  their 
Helper.  The  least  chance  of  a  natural  explanation, 
60  excites  the  pride  of  man,  that  he  forgets  God. 
Whatever  Gideon  had  hitherto  experienced,  his 
vocation  as  well  as  the  fulfillment  of  his  petitions, 
was  granted  in  view  of  his  humility,  which  would 
not  let  him  think  anything  great  of  himself.  The 
number  of  warriors  with  which  he  conquers  must 
be  so  small,  that  the  miraculous  character  of  the 
victory  shall  be  evident  to  everybody.  This  belief 
in  divine  intervention  will  make  Israel  free ;  for 
not  the  winning  of  a  battle,  but  only  obedience 
toward  God  can  keep  it  so. 

Ver.  3.  Whosoever  is  fearful  and  afraid,  let 
him  turn  back  and  depart  from  Mount  Gilead. 2 
The  narrative  is  evidently  very  condensed  ;  for  it 
connects  the  result  of  the  proclamation  immediately 
with  God's  command  to  Gideon  to  make  it,  without 
mentioning  its  execution  by  him.  By  reason  of 
this  brevity,  sundry  obscurities  arise,  both  here  and 
farther  on,  which  it  is  difficult  to  clear  up.     The 

words  t^an  inn  "fe^.T,  ■' and  turn  away 
from  Mount  Gilead,"  have  long  given  offense,  and 
occasioned  various  unnecessary  conjectures.  ~I2?\ 
it  is  true,  occurs  only  in  this  passage ;  but  it  is  mani- 
festly cognate  with  iT^sQI2,  circle,  crown.  Hence, 
that  the  verb  means  to  turn  away  or  about,  is  cer- 
tain, especially  as  the  Greek  a<pa7pa,  ball,  sphere, 
must  belong  to  the  same  root.3    Gideon,  in  bidding 

the  timorous  depart,  after  the  milder  2t27',  uses  the 

somewhat  stronger  ~ 1C1J1-  "  let  the  fearful  take 
himself  off !  "4 

But  what  is  meant  by  turning  from  "  Mount 
Gilead  !  "  h  For  Gilead  is  beyond  the  Jordan  (ch. 
v.  17).     It   has   therefore   been  proposed   to  read 

?'2b3,  Gilboa,  instead  of  "^l}->  Gilead,  which 
would  be  a  very  unfortunate  substitution.  For,  in 
the  first  place,"  the  battle  did  not  occur  at  Mount 

1  [Bertheau  assumes  that  En  Cbarod  is  the  same  fountain 
as  the  modern  AinJalud,  flowing  from  the  base  of  Gilboa,  see 
Rob.  Bibl.  Res.  ii.  323.  Aceordingly,  Gilboa  would  be  the 
mountain  on  which  Gideon  was  eneamped,  and  Little  Her- 
mon  (on  which  see  Rob.  ii.  326}  would  answer  to  Moreh. 
On  this  combination  Keil  remarks,  that  "  although  possible, 
it  is  very  uncertain,  and  scarcely  reconcilable  with  the 
statements  of  ver.  23  tf.  and  ch.  viii.  4,  as  to  the  road 
taken  by  the  defeated  Midianites." — Tr.] 

■2  Epaminondas,  when  advancing  against  the  Spartans  at 
Leuctra,  observed  the  unreliable  character  of  some  confed- 
erates. To  prevent  being  endangered  by  them,  he  caused 
it  to  be  proclaimed,  that  "  Whoever  of  the  Boeotians  wished 
to  withdraw,  were  at  liberty  to  do  so."     Polyaenus,  ii.  3. 

S  Under  this  view,  the  conjectures  adopted  by  Benfey 
(Gt.  Or-  i.  579;  ii.  367)  fall  away  of  themselves. 

4  [The  German  is  :  "  Wer  feize  se-i,  trolte  sichvam  Berge." 
The  author  then  adds:  "The  German  ilrollen,  trollen.  has 
in  tact  a  similar  origin-  It  means  l  to  turn  one's  self ; "  rlrol 
is  that  which  is  turned,  also  a  "coil."  Sieh  trolltn  [Eng- 
lish to  pack  one's  self],  is  proverbially  equivalent  to  tak- 
ing one's  departure,  recedere.  Cf.  Grimm,  WGrterbitch,  ii. 
W29,  etc."—  Tr.1 


Gilboa  ;  and  in  the  next  place,  by  this  reading  the 
peculiar  feature  of  the  sentence  would  be  lost.  Tc 
be  sure,  Gilead  does  not  here  mean  the  country  of 
that  name  east  of  the  Jordan.  Indeed,  it  does  not 
seem  to  indicate  a  country  at  all,  but  rather  the 
character  of  the  militant  tribe.  Gideon  belongs  to 
the  tribe  of  Manasseh.  From  Manasseh  likewise 
descended  Gilead,  a  son  of  Machir  (Num.  xxvi. 
29)  ;  and  the  sons  of  Machir  took  possession  of 
Gilead  (Num.  xxxii.  40).  Nevertheless,  the  Song 
of  Deborah  distinguishes  between  Machir  and  Gil- 
ead. The  name  Machir  there  represents  the  peace- 
able character  of  the  tribe :  Gilead  stands  for  its 
military  spirit.  Joshua  xvii.  1  affirms  expressly 
that  Gilead  was  a  "man  of  war."  From  Gilead 
heroes  like  Jephthah  descend.  Jehu  also  is  reck- 
oned to  it.a  The  valor  of  Jabesh  Gilead  is  well 
known.  In  a  bad  sense,  Hosea  (ch.  vi.  S)  speaks 
of  Gilead  as  the  home  of  wild  and  savage  men. 
Here,  therefore,  Gilead  stands  in  very  significant 

contrast  with  T"7  •  "  'e'  him,"  cries  the  hero, 
"  who  is  cowardly  and  fearful  depart  from  the 
mountain  of  Gilead,  who  (as  Jephthah  said)  takes 
his  life  in  his  hand,  unterrified  before  the  foe." 7 
For  the  rest,  however,  the  name  Gilead  was  not 
confined  to  the  east-Jordanic  country.  This  ap- 
pears from  ch.  xii.  4,  where  we  read  that  the 
Ephraimites  called  the  Gileadites  fugitives  of  Eph- 
raim,  "  for  Gilead  was  between  Epliraim  and 
Manasseh."  Now,  Ephraim's  territorial  posses- 
sions were  all  west  of  the  Jordan.  From  this,  there- 
fore, and  from  the  fact  that  the  western  half  tribe 
of  Manasseh  and  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  were  partly 
interlocated  (cf.  Josh.  xvii.  8-10),  it  is  evident  that 
the  names  of  the  eastern  Gilead  were  also  in  vogue 
on  this  side  the  Jordan.     He  who  would  be  with 

Gilead,  must  be  no  '  TTI1  (trembler):  out  of 
32,000  men,  22,000  perceive  this,  and  retire. 

That  numbers  do  not  decide  in  battle,  is  a  fact 
abundantly  established  by  the  history  of  ancient 
nations  ;  nor  has  modern  warfare,  though  it  deals 
in  the  life  and  blood  of  the  masses,  brought  dis- 
credit upon  it.  It  is  a  fine  remark  which  Tacitus 
(Annal.  xiv.  36,  3)  puts  into  the  mouth  of  Sue- 
tonius :  Etiam  in  nudtis  hgionibus,  paucos  esse  qui 
proelia  projUyarent  —  "  even  with  many  legions,  it  is 
always  the  few  who  win  the  battle."  The  instance 
adduced  by  Serarius  from  Livy  (xxix.  1),  has  no 
proper  relation  to  that  before  us.  It  would  be  more 
suitable  to  instance  Leonidas,  if  it  be  true,  as  He- 
rodotus (vii.  220)  intimates,  that  at  the  battle  of 

5  Dathe  proposes  to  read  ad  montetn,  and  Michaelis  to 
point  "^nE,  "  quickly,"  instead  of  "intt,  "  from  the 
mountain."  Neither  proposition  can  be  entertained  (cf. 
Doderlein,  Tkeol.  Biblinlh.,  iii.  326). 

6  [By  the  ancient  Jewish  expositors,  cf.  Dr.  Cassel's  article 
on  Jehu    in   Herzog's   Realencykl.   vi.  466.    "  In   so  doing 

they  probably  explained  son  of  Nimshi  (^ITDS)  as  son  of  a 

Manassite  (*t£3^5),  i-  «•  a  son  out  of  the  tribe  of  Manas- 
seh." —  Te.] 

7  [Ewald  ( Gesch.  Israel's,  ii.  500,  note)  has  the  followinj 
on  this  proclamation  :  "  From  the  unusual  words  and  their 
rounding,  it  is  easy  to  perceive  that  they  contain  an  ancient 
proverb,  which  in  its  literal  sense  would  be  especially  ap- 
propriate to  the  tribe  of  Manasseh.  "  Mount  Gilead,"  the 
place  of  Jacob's  severest  struggles  (Gen.  xxxi.  etc.),  may 
very  well,  from  patriarchal  times,  have  become  a  proverbial 
equivalent  for  "  scene  of  conflict,"  which  is  manifestly  all  that 
the  name  here  means.  And  Manasseh  was  the  very  tribe 
which  had  often  found  that  for  them  also  Gilead  was  a  place 
of  battle,  cf  p.  391."— Tu.] 


CHAPTER   VTI.    1-ft. 


128 


Thermopylas  he  dismissed  his  confederates  because 
he  knew  tiiem  to  be  deficient  in  bravery ;  in  relation 
to  which,  however,  Plutarch's  vehement  criticism  is 
to  be  considered  (cf.  Kaltwasser,  in  Pint.  Morn!. 
Abhandl.,  vi.  732).  Noteworthy  is  the  imitation 
of  Gideon's  history  in  a  North-German  legend 
(MuHenhoff,  Sagen,  etc.  p.  426).  In  that  as  in 
many  other  legends,  magic  takes  the  place  of 
God." 

Vers.  4.  Bring  them  down  unto  the  water, 
and  I  will  try  them  for  thee  there.  There  is  no 
lack  of  water  in  this  region.  Ponds,  wells,  and 
bodies  of  standing  water,  are  described  by  Robin- 
eon  {Bibt.  Res.  iii.  115,  116).  Beside  these,  Gideon 
had  the  Kishon  behind  him,  which  in  the  rainy 
6eason  is  full  of  water. 

Vers.  5-7.  Every  one  that  lappeth  of  the 
water.  The  meaning  of  this  test,  the  second  which 
Gideon  was  to  apply,  is  obscured  by  the  brevity  of 
the  narrative.  The  question  is,  What  characteristic 
did  it  show  in  the  300  men,  that  they  did  not  drink 
water  kneeling,  but  lapped  it  with  their  tongues, 
like  dogs.  Bertheau  has  followed  the  view  of 
Josephus  (Ant.  v.  6,  3),  which  makes  those  who 
drink  after  the  manner  of  dogs  to  be  the  faint- 
hearted. According  to  this  view,  the  victory  is  the 
more  wonderful,  because  it  was  gained  by  the  timid 
and  fearful.  But  this  explanation  does  not  accord 
with  the  traditional  exegesis  of  the  Jews,  as  handed 
down  by  others.  Moreover,  it  contradicts  the 
spirit  of  the  whole  narrative.  When  Gideon  was 
chosen,  it  was  for  the  very  reason  that  he  was  a 
"  valiant  hero  "  (ch.  vi.  12).  All  those  who  were 
deficient  in  courage  were  sent  home  by  the  procla- 
mation (ver.  3).  If  faint-heartedness  were  de- 
manded, the  brave  should  have  been  dismissed. 
Finally,  God  saves  by  few,  indeed,  if  they  trust  in 
Him,  but  not  by  cravens.  Cowardice  is  a  negative 
quality,  unable  even  to  trust.  To  do  wonders  with 
cowards,  is  a  contradiction  in  adjecto  ;  for  if  they 
fight,  they  are  no  longer  cowards.  Cowardice  is  a 
condition  of  soul  which  cannot  become  the  medium 
of  divine  deeds ;  for  even  the  valiant  few,  when 
they  attack  the  many  and  conquer,  are  strong  only 
because  of  their  divine  confidence.  Besides,  it  is 
plainly  implied  that  all  those  who  now  went  with 
Gideon,  were  resolute  for  war.  The  Jewish  in- 
terpretation, communicated  by  Raschi,  is  evidently 
far  more  profound.  Gideon,  it  says,  can  ascertain 
the  religious  antecedents  of  his  men  from  the  way 
in  which  they  prepare  to  drink.  Idolators  were  ac- 
customed to  pray  kneeling  before  their  idols.  On 
this  account,  kneeling,  even  as  a  mere  bodily  pos- 
ture, had  become  unpopular  and  ominous  in  Israel, 
and  was  avoided  as  much  as  possible.  Hence,  he 
who  in  order  to  drink  throws  himself  on  his  knees, 
shows  thereby,  in  a  perfectly  free  and  natural  man- 
ner, that  this  posture  is  nothing  unusual  to  him  ; 
whereas  those  who  have  never  been  accustomed  to 
kneel,  feel  no  need  of  doing  it  now,  and  as  naturally 
refrain  from  it.  It  would  have  been  difficult  for 
Gideon  to  have  ascertained,  in  any  other  way, 
what  had  been  the  attitude  of  his  men  towards 
idolatry.  While  quenching  their  eager  thirst,  all 
deliberation  being  forgotten,  they  freely  and  un- 
restrainedly indicate  to  what  posture  they  were 
habituated.  It  is  a  principle  pervading  the  legen- 
dary lore  of  all  nations,  that  who  and  what  a  person 
is,  can  only  be  ascertained  by  observing  him  when 

1  The  same  popular  belief  recurs  in  various  forms ;  in 
many  of  which  the  rudeness  and  ndictti  of  the  manner 
conceals  the  profundity  of  the  thought.  Cf.  Grimm,  Kin- 
iermarchen,  ii.  229  ;  Miillenhoff,  Sagen,  p.  384. 

'i  An  image  of  heathenism  an i  Israel,  which  from  incon 


under  no  constraint  of  any  kind.1  The  queen  of» 
Northern  legend  exchanges  dresses  with  her  maid  ; 
but  she  who  is  not  the  queen,  is  recognized  by  hei 
drinking  (cf.  Simrock,  Quellendes  Sltaksp.  iii.  171 ) 
That  which  is  here  in  Scripture  accepted  with  ref- 
erence to  religious  life  and  its  recognition,  popular 
literature  applies  to  the  keen  discriminating  observ- 
ance of  social  life.  —  This  view  of  the  mark  afforded 
by  the  act  of  kneeling,  is  not  opposed  by  the  fact 
that  in  the  temple  the  worshipper  bowed  himself 
before  God.  It  is  announced  to  Elijah  (1  Kgs. 
xix.  18),  that  only  7,000  shall  be  left:  "All  the 
knoes  which  have  not  bowed  unto  Baal,  and  every 
mouth  which  hath  not  kissed  him."  To  bow  the 
knee  is  an  honor  due  to  God  alone.  Hence,  Mor- 
decai  refuses  to  kneel  to  a  man  (Esth.  iii.  5). 
Hence,  God  proclaims  by  the  prophet  (Isa.  xlv.  23) : 
"  Unto  me  every  knee  shall  bow."  The  three 
hundred  —  this  is  what  God  makes  Gideon  to  know 
—  have  never  kneeled  before  Baal ;  they  are  clean 
men  ;  and  with  clean  vessels,  men,  and  animals, 
God  is  accustomed  to  do  wonderful  things.  Mid- 
ian's  idolatrous  people  shall  be  smitten  only  by 
such  as  have  always  been  free  from  their  idols. 

However  satisfactory  and  in  harmony  with  the 
Biblical  spirit  this  explanation  may  be  as  it  stands, 
let  something  nevertheless  be  added  to  it.    Verse  5 

says :  itrs?  cttn-]^  •iaitrba  pV-nrs  bs 

"ob  iniW  y?r\  nb^n  pS\  In  verse  6  the 
phraseology  changes ;  it  speaks  of  those  who 
Z:rr2-Uf<  D"P5  Cppbpn.  Now,  as  they  would 
naturally  use  the  hollow  hand  to  take  up  the  water 
and  carry  it  to  the  mouth,  thus  making  it  answer 
to  the  concave  tongne  of  a  dog,  it  is  evident  that 
we  must  so  understand  the  words  quoted  from  ver. 

5,  as  if  it  read:  t^STr-ja  IT?    p>  -|£fej  b'Z 

w;ba  nbjn  pb;  -igjfc»3>  »  aii  who  sip  water 

with  their  hands,  as  the  dog  with  his  tongue." 
However  that  may  be,  the  circumstance  must  not 
be  overlooked  that  a  comparison  with  the  sipping 
of  a  dog  is  here  instituted ;  for  if  the  comparison 
had  no  special  significance,  it  would  have  sufficed 
to  distinguish  between  those  who  drank  standing 
and  those  who  drank  kneeling.  It  was  the  percep- 
tion of  this,  doubtless,  which  induced  the  common 
reference  to  what  JElian  (Hist.  Anim.,  vi.  53)  says  of 
the  dogs  of  Egypt,  that  for  tear  of  crocodiles  they 
drink  quickly,  while  running.  And  from  this  arose 
the  view,  already  confuted,  that  the  three  hundred 
who  imitated  the  lapping  of  dogs,  were  spiritless  and 
cowardly.  But  the  comparison  must  be  viewed  more 
profoundly.  Those  Egyptian  dogs  are  the  type,  not 
of  cowardice,  but  of  caution.  It  is  known  that  the 
crocodiles  of  the  Nile  were  not  the  only  ones  of 
their  kind  eager  to  seize  on  dogs  ;  those  of  Centra! 
America  (the  Cayman  alligator)  are  not  less  so. 
In  Cuba,  likewise,  dogs  will  not  drink  from  rivers, 
lest  their  greedy  foe  might  suddenly  spring  on 
them  (cf.  Oken.  "Naturgesch.,  vi.  666).  The  croco- 
dile is  the  image  of  the  adversary ;  against  whom 
they  are  on  their  guard,  who  do  not  so  drink,  that 
from  eagerness  to  quench  their  thirst,  they  fall  into 
his  hands.2  Sensual  haste  would  forget  the  threat- 
ening danger.  To  these  considerations,  add  the 
follovt'ing :  ■  The  heroic  achievement  of  the  three 
hundred  is  a  surprise,  in  which  they  throw  thera- 

siderate  thirst  for  enjoyment,  so  often  falls  into  the  jaws  of 
sin.  The  godly  rejoice  with  trembling,  and  enjoy  with 
watchfulness,  that  they  may  not  become  a  prey  to  th« 
enemy. 

'■'■  The  most  remarkable  confirmation  of  this  narrative 


124 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


selves,  as  it  were,  into  the  jaws  of  the  sleeping 
foe.  Now,  the  ancients  tell  of  an  animal,  "  sim- 
ilar to  a  dog,"  which,  hostile  to  the  crocodile, 
throws  itself  into  the  jaws  of  the  reptile  when 
asleep,  and  kills  it  internally.     This  animal,  called 

Hydras,  or  1VH3N  (cf.  Phys-  St/rus,  ed.  Tychsen, 
cap.  xxxi.  p.  170),  has  been  rightly  considered  to 
be  the  Ichneumon,  the  crocodile's  worst  enemy. 
Its  name  signifies,  "  Tracker."  Tracking,  Ixveiew, 
is  the  special  gift  of  dogs.  Among  five  animals 
before  whom  the  strong  must  fear,  the   Talmud 

(Sabbat,  77,  b)  names  the  fTO1??,1  from  3^5, 

dog,  as  being  a  terror  of  the  IH^!?,  crocodile. 
The  band  who  drink  like  the  Egyptian  dog,  per- 
form a  deed  similar  to  that  which  the  dog-like 
animal  has  ascribed  to  it.  They  throw  themselves 
upon  the  sleeper;  and,  courageous  though  few, 
become  the  terror  of  the  mighty  foe.  If  it  may  be 
assumed  that  for  the  sake  of  such  hints  the  simili- 
tude of  the  sipping  dog  was  chosen  for  the  three 
hundred  companions  of  Gideon,  the  whole  passage, 
it  must  be  allowed,  becomes  beautiful  and  clear. 
He  who  has  never  inclined  to  idolatry,  who  has 
exercised  caution  against  hostile  blandishments 
and  mastered  his  own  desires,  —  he,  like  the  ani- 
mal before  alluded  to,  will  be  fitted,  notwithstand- 
ing his  weakness,  to  surprise  and  overcome  the 
enemy,  how  strong  soever  he  be.  The  similitude. 
in  this  view,  is  analogous  to  various  other  sig- 
nificant psychological  propositions,  expressive  of 
fundamental  moral  principles.2 

Ver.  8.  They  took  the  victuals  from  the  peo- 
ple in  their  hands.     The  words  of  the  original 

are  :  nys  QV11  rnSTlS  TIRM.  Offense  has 
naturally  been  taken  at  ^"J'-r.  '■  instead  of  which 

nii",  in  the  stat.  constr.,  was  to  be  expected.  The 
older  Jewish  expositors  endeavored  to  support  the 
unusual  form  by  a  similar  one  in  Ps.  xlv.  5,  >^}3¥1 

P!Tr?  ;  but  the  two  are  not  exactly  parallel,  either 
in  sense  or  form,  to  say  nothing  of  Olshausen's 
proposal  to  emend  the  latter  passage  also.     On  the 

other  hand,  it  is  certainly  surprising  that  JT1S  is 
not  found  in  a  single  manuscript,  although  it  was 
so  natural  to  substitute  it  in  effect,  as  was  done  by 

the  ancient  versions.  Nor  is  it  clear  that  H12 
can  be  read.3  It  is  not  to  be  assumed  that  the  three 
hundred  men  took  all  the  provisions  of  the  other 
thousands.  It  would  be  quite  impossible  to  compre- 
hend how  the  former  were  benefited  by  such  super- 
abundance, or  how  the  latter  could  dispense  with 
all  means  of  subsistence.  The  sense  can  only  be 
that  the  three  hundred  took  their  provisions  out  of 
the  supplies  for  the  whole  army.  As  the  great 
body  of  the  army  was  about  to  leave  them,  this 
little  troop  took  from  the  common  stores  as  much 
as  they  needed.     We  are  not  therefore  to  correct 

PHS  into  HIS,  but  to  supply  7»  before  EVn. 
The  matter  is  further  explained  by  the  addition 
D7t^*     From  the  common  stores  of  the  supply- 

tonsidered  in  its  symbolic  import,  is  found  in  a  German 
legend,  communicated  by  Birlinger  (  Votkslhumliehes  aus 
Schwaben,  i.  il6),  in  which  the  she-wolf  recognizes  as  gen- 
muc  only  those  among  her  young  who  drink  water,  while 
■be  regards  those  who  lap  like  dogs  as  young  wolf-dogs, 
knd  her  worst  enemies.     Accordingly,  dogs  who  lap,  in  the 


train,  they  look  what  they  needed  for  themselves 
in  their  own  hands,  for  the  others  were  going  away 
The  ca6e  was  not  much  different  with  the  tram- 
pets.  The  three  hundred  needed  one  each ;  so 
many  had  therefore  to  be  taken  from  the  people 
There  is  nothing  to  show,  nor  is  it  to  be  assumed, 
that  the  other  thousands  kept  none  at  all,  or  that 
at  the  outset  the  whole  ten  thousand  had  onl} 
three  hundred  trumpets.  The  three  hundred  took 
from  the  body  of  the  army  what,  according  to  their 
numbers,  they  needed  to  venture  the  battle.  —  The 
others  Gideon  dismissed,  "  every  one  to  his  tent.' 
To  be  dismissed,  or  to  go  to  the  tents,  is  the  stand- 
ing formula  by  which  the  cessation  of  the  mobile 
condition  of  the  army  is  indicated.  The  peoplt 
are  free  from  military  "duty ;  but  they  do  not  appear 
to  have  entirely  disbanded. 

He  retained  the  three  hundred.  With  these 
he  intended  to  give  battle ;  and  the  conflict  was 
near  at  hand,  for  the  hostile  army  lay  before  him 
in  the  valley  below. 


H0M1LETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

Starke  :  Christianity  requires  manliness ;  away, 
therefore,  with  those  who  always  plead  the  weak- 
ness of  the  flesh.  —  The  same  :  It  matters  little 
how  insignificant  we  are  considered,  if  we  only 
conquer.  —  The  same  :  We  should  regard,  not  the 
means  which  God  uses  for  our  physical  and  spirit- 
ual deliverance,  but  the  God  who  uses  them.  — 
The  same  :  Though  men  do  nothing,  but  only 
stand  in  the  order  appointed,  God  by  his  omnip- 
otence can  effect  more  than  when  they  work  their 
busiest.  —  Gerlach  :  God's  genuine  soldiers  never 
seek  their  strength  in  numbers,  nor  ever  weaken 
their  ranks  by  the  reception  of  half-hearted,  sloth- 
ful, and  timorous  persons.  In  times  of  peace,  they 
may  for  love's  sake  hold  fellowship  with  many ; 
but  when  battle  is  to  be  waged  for  the  Lord,  it  is 
necessary  to  get  rid  of  all  those  who  could  only 
weaken  the  host. 

[Be.  Hall:  Gideon's  army  must  be  lessened 
Who  are  so  fit  to  be  cashiered  as  the  fearful  ?  God 
bids  him,  therefore,  proclaim  license  for  all  faint 
hearts  to  leave  the  field.  An  ill  instrument  may 
shame  a  good  work.  God  will  not  glorify  himself 
by  cowards.  As  the  timorous  shall  be  without  the 
gates  of  heaven,  so  shall  they  be  without  the  lists 
of  God's  field.  Although  it  was  not  their  courage 
that  should  save  Israel,  yet  without  their  courage 
God  would  not  serve  Himself  of  them.  Chris- 
tianity requires  men ;  for  if  our  spiritual  diffi- 
culties meet  not  with  high  spirits,  instead  of  whet- 
ting our  fortitude,  they  quell  it.  —  The  same: 
But  now,  who  can  but  bless  himself  to  find  of  two 
and  thirty  thousand  Israelites,  two  and  twenty 
thousand  cowards?  Yet  all  these  in  Gideon's 
march,  made  as  fair  a  flourish  of  courage  as  the 
boldest.  Who  can  trust  the  faces  of  men,  that 
sees  in  the  army  of  Israel  above  two  for  one  tim- 
orous !  —  Scott  :  Many  who  have  real  faith  and 
grace  are  unfit  for  special  services,  and  unable  to 
bear  peculiar  trials,  from  which  therefore  the  Lord 
will  exempt  them  ;  and  to  which  He  will  appoint 

manner  which  Gideon  wishes  to  see  imitated  by  his  faithful 
ones,  are  the  enemies  of  the  rapacious  wolf. 

1  [Women  vermis  aqitatilis,  qui  insrredilur  aitres  piscium 
majorum.     Buxtorff,  Lex.  Talm.  —  Tr.] 

2  Cf.  my  Essay  on  Den  armen  Htinrkk,  in  the  Weim 
Jahrbuck  fur  Deutsche  Spracke,  i.  410. 

8  Keil  is  among  those  who  propose  to  adopt  it 


CHAPTER  VII.   9-11. 


125 


tliose  to  whom  He  has  given  superior  hardiness, 
boldness,  and  firmness  of  spirit ;  and  very  trivia] 
incidents  will  sometimes  make  a  discovery  of  men's 


capacities  and  dispositions,  and  show  wio  are  ant! 
who  are  not  to  be  depended  on  in  arduous  under 
takings.  —  Tr.] 


Gideon  is  directed  to  advance  against  the  enemy  ;  but  to  increase  his  confidence  he  i$ 
authorized  to  make  a  previous  visit  to  the  hostile  encampment. 

Chapter  VII.  9-11. 

9  And  it  came  to  pass  the  same  night,  that  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  said  unto  him, 
Arise,  get  thee  down  unto  [descend  against]  the  host  [camp]  ;  for  I  have  deliv 

10  ered  it  into  thine  hand.     But  if  thou  [yet]  fear  to  go  down,  go  thou  [first]  with 

11  Phurah  thy  servant  down  to  the  host  [camp]  :  And  thou  shalt  hear  what  they  say; 
and  afterward  shall  thine  hands  be  strengthened  to  go  down  unto  [against]  the 
host  [camp].  Then  went  he  down  with  Phurah  his  servant  unto  the  outside  of  the 
armed  men  that  were  in  the  host  [camp]. 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL 

Ver.  9.  Arise,  descend !  The  three  hundred 
who  are  with  Gideon  are  enough.  The  hero  may 
venture  the  assault  with  them.  The  hosts  of 
Miilian,  despite  their  numbers,  will  not  withstand 
their  enthusiasm  of  faith.  Not  fortune,  but  God, 
will  help  the  brave.  There  is  no  more  time  for 
delay.  The  harvest  waits  for  the  reaper;  of  that 
Gideon  may  convince  himself.  Let  him  hear  what 
they  say,  and  he  will  learn  that  they  are  more  in 
dread  than  to  be  dreaded.  The  command  addressed 
to  Gideon  in  this  verse,  bids  him  make  a  general 
assault  with  all  his  men  (which  Bertheau  has  failed 
to  perceive).  It  is  only  when  the  undertaking  still 
appears  too  venturesome  to  him,  that  he  is  bidden 
first  to  convince  himself  of  the  spirit  which  rules 
in  the  camp  of  Midian.  Again  and  again  does 
the  narrative  inculcate  the  lesson  that  victory  re- 
sults only  from  full,  undivided,  unbroken,  and  en- 
thusiastic confidence.  Every  shadow  of  hesitation 
is  removed  by  God,  before  the  hero  advances  to  his 
great  exploit. 

Ver.  10.  Go  thou  with  Phurah  thy  servant. 
The  case  of  Diomed,  who  according  to  Homer  (//. 
x.  220),  ventures  into  the  camp  of  the  Trojans,  is 
not  altogether  analogous.1  Diomed  is  to  find  out 
what  the  Trojans  ate  doing,  and  design  to  do ; 
Gideon  is  only  to  learn  the  spirit  of  his  enemy,  as 
they  freely  converse  together.  Diomed  also  desires 
a  companion,  "  for  two  going  together  better  ob- 
serve what  is  profitable."  Gideon's  servant  goes 
with  him,  not  for  this  purpose,  but  that  he  also 
may  hear  what  Gideon  hears,  and  may  testify  to 
his  fellow  soldiers  of  what  Gideon  tells  them,  so 
that  they  may  follow  with  the  same  assured  courage 
with  which  he  leads.  The  two  commands  are 
very  clearly  distinguished.    Gideon  with  his  troop 

were  to  advance  "  against "  (2,  as  in  ch.  v.  13)  the 
;ncampment ;  but  Gideon  and  his  servant  are  to 

1  In  the  inn  ff  Zur  Hohen  Schul"  in  Ulm,  there  is  still 
Ihown  a  portrait  of  QustaTUS  Adolphus,  as  during  the  war 
he  appeared,  disguised,  in  that  city,  as  a  spy,  which  is  only 
%  legend.     In  like  manner,  it  is  told  of  Alfred  the  Great  ** 


go  "  unto  "  (b^l)  it.  —  The  name  Phurah  OTJQ), 

does  not  occur  elsewhere.  Pere  (K"^S  or  T5) 
is  a  wild  ass,  onager,  an  animal  much  talked  of  and 
greatly  dreaded  among  the  Orientals.  Here,  how- 
ever, the  Masorites  have  pointed  the  same  radicals 

^ "^S  ;  according  to  which  the  name  of  the  servant, 
as  signifying  "  Branch "  (T^W?)'  was  not  un- 
aptly chosen "!??  means  both  boy  and  servant 

or  attendant. 

Ver.  11.  As  far  as  the  line  (limit)  of  the  van- 
guard to  the  camp,  D^EJCnn  ni'p'bs.  The 
meaning  of  D^ti'Srin  js  obscure,  although  the 
rendering  of  the  LXX.  at  Josh.  i.  14  affords  a  hint 
toward  a   probable   explanation.       ^X?n    is    the 

small  of  the  back,  above  the  hips  (lumbus,  lumbi 
quinque  inferiores  spina  vertebral),  about  which  the 
girdle,  zona,  was  worn.  The  chamushim  were  not, 
however,  simply  those  who  were  girdled  anu 
equipped,  but  as  the  LXX.  indicate  in  the  passage 
referred  to,  the  ei/favot,  the  we/Z-girdled ;  which 
term  the  Greeks  also  used  to  designate  the  light- 
armed  troops,  who  were  everywhere  in  use  as  van 
and  rear  guards.  Among  many  passages  in 
Herodotus,  Thueydides,  Xenophon,  and  others,  it 
will  be  sufficient  to  quote  the  following  from  the 
Cyropaedia  (v.  3,  56),  as  illustrating  this  use  of  the 
Greek  word  :  "On  irpb  TTavros  rou  arpartvp-aTos  ire- 
£ous  ev^dji/ovs  ....  Trpot/ncfjLirev.  The  same 
position  as  vanguard  is,  according  to  Josh.  i.  14,  oc- 
cupied in  the  Israelitish  host  by  the  two  and  a  half 
trans-Jordanic  tribes :  "  Ye  shall  march  before  your 
brethren  as  chamushim."  These  tribes  had  left 
their  families  beyond  the  Jordan,  and  were  there- 
fore freer  and  lighter,  expeditiores.  To  the  same 
class  of  soldiery  belonged  the  chamushim,  to  whom 

England,  that  in  order  to  inspect  for  himself  the  situation  o 
the  Danes,  he  entered  their  camp  as  a  harper.  Uuiua, 
Hist,  of  Eng.  i.  68. 


.lb 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


Gideon  approached.  They  formed  the  outer  rim 
of  the  encampment,  and  beyond  them  Gideon  did 
not  venture  to  proceed,  if  for  no  other  reason,  for 

1  [Bertheau  says,  indeed,  that  the  ehcanushim  numbered 
135,000  men,  cf  ch.  viii.  10  ;  but  by  the  chamuskim,  he, 
like  most  scholars,  understands  not  the  vanguard  of  the 
hostile  army,  but  the  whole  body  of  fighting  men  in  the 
triny.  "The  eastern  tribes,''  he  says,  "had  invaded  the 
land  with   their  herds  and  tents,  i.  e.   families,  ch.  vi.  5. 

Among  such  nomadic  tribes,  the  warriors,  called  D^tf^rT 


want  of  time.  What  Bertheau  says  about  135,OOC 
men  who  constituted  this  body,1  is  like  his  whole 
explanation  of  the  passage,  a  misapprehension. 

or  Z"**-!  ^\  Josh.  iv.  12,  13,  are  distinguished  from  the 
body  of  the  people.  The  former,  in  view  of  the  impending 
battle,  were  not  scattered  among  the  mass  of  the  people,  bu* 
were  collected  together  in  the  camp  to  the  number  of  135, 
000."  —  Tk.] 


Gideon  and  his  attendant  secretly  visit  the  hostile  camp.   The  dream  of  the  soldier  ana 
its  interpretation.      The  night-surprise,  confusion,  and  pursuit. 

Chapter  VII.  12-25. 


12  And  the  Midianites,  and  the  Amalekites,  and  all  the  children  [sons]  of  the  east, 
lay  along  in  the  valley  like   grasshoppers   [locusts]  for  multitude ;  and  their  cam- 

13  els  were  without  number,  as  the  sand  by  the  sea-side  for  multitude.  And  when 
Gideon  was  come,  behold,  there  ivas  a  man  that  told  a  dream  unto  his  fellow,  and 
said,  Behold,  I  dreamed  a  dream,  and  lo,  a  [round]  cake  of  barley -bread  tumbled 
into  [rolled  itself  against]  the  host  [camp]  of  Midian,  and  came  unto  a  [the]  tent 
[i.  e.  the  tents ;  the  singular,  used  collectively],  and  smote  it  that  it  fell,  and  overturned  it  that 

14  the  tent  \j.  e.  all  the  tents]  lay  along.  And  his  fellow  answered,  and  said,  This  is  noth- 
ing else  save  the  sword  of  Gideon  the  son  of  Joash,  a  [the]  man  of  Israel  :for  [omit : 

15  for]  into  his  hand  hath  God  delivered  Midian,  and  all  the  host  [camp].  And  it  was 
so,  when  Gideon  heard  the  telling  of  the  dream,  and  the  interpretation  thereof,  that  he 
worshipped,  and  returned  into  the  host  [camp]  of  Israel,  and  said.  Arise ;  for  the  Lord 

16  [Jehovah]  hath  delivered  into  your  hand  the  host  [camp]  of  Midian.  And  he  divided 
the  three  hundred  men  into  three  companies,  and  he  put  a  trumpet  in  every  man's 

17  hand,  with  empty  pitchers,  and  lamps  [torches]  within  the  pitchers.  And  he  said  unto 
them,  Look  on  me,  and  do  likewise  :  and  behold,  when  I  come  to  the  outside  of  the 

18  camp,  it  shall  be  that  as  I  do,  so  shall  ye  do.  When  I  blow  with  a  [the]  trumpet, 
I  and  all  that  are  with  me,  then  blow  ye  the  trumpets  also  on  every  side  of  all  the 

19  camp,  and  say,  The  sword  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  and  of  Gideon.  So  Gideon,  and 
the  hundred  men  that  were  with  him,  came  unto  the  outside  of  the  camp  in  the  be- 
ginning of  the  middle  watch  ;  and  they  had  but  newly  set  the  watch  :  and  they  blew 
the  trumpets,  and  brake  the  pitchers  that  were  in  their  hands.  And  the  three  com- 
panies blew  the  trumpets  [ail  at  once],  and  brake  the  pitchers,  and  held  [took]  the 
lamps  [torches]  in  their  left  hands,  and  the  trumpets  in  their  right  hands  to  blow 
withal :  and  they  cried,  The  sword  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  and  of  Gideon.  And  they 
stood  every  man  in  his  place  round  about  the  camp  ;  and  all  the  host  [camp]  ran  [was 

22  thrown  into  commotion],  and  cried,  and  tied.  And  the  three  hundred  blew  the  trumpets,  and 
[meanwhile]  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  set  every  man's  sword  against  his  fellow,  even  through- 
out [and  against]  all  the  host  [camp]  :  and  the  host  [camp]  fled  to  Beth-sluttah 
[the  House  of  Acacias]  in  [toward]  Zererath   [Zererah],  and  [omit:  and]   to  the 

23  border  [edge]  of  Abel-meholah,  unto  [near]  Tabbath.  And  the  men  of  Israel 
gathered  themselves  together  out  of  Naphtali,  and  out  of  Asher,  and  out  of  all  Manas- 

24  seh,  and  pursued  after  the  Midianites.  And  Gideon  sent  messengers  throughout  all 
Mount  Ephraim,  saying,  Come  down  against  the  Midianites,  and  take  [seize]  before 
them  the  waters  unto  Beth-barah  and  [the]  Jordan.  Then  all  the  men  of  Ephraim 
gathered  themselves  together,  and  took  [seized]  the  waters  unto  Beth-barah  and  [the] 

25  Jordan.  And  they  took  two  princes  of  the  Midianites,  Oreb  and  Zeeb  [Raven  and 
Wolf]  ;  and  they  slew  Oreb  upon  [at]  the  rock  Oreb  [Raven's  Rock],  and  Zeeb  they 


20 


21 


slew  at  the  wine-press  of  Zeeb  [Wolfs  Press 
heads  of  Oreb  and  Zeeb  to  Gideon  on  [from 


and  pursued  Midian,  and  brought  the 
the  other  side  [of  the]  Jordan. 


CHAPTER   VII.    12-25. 


127 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  12.  And  Martian  and  Amalek.  The 
pregnant  and  musing  character  of  the  style  of  our 
Book,  notwithstanding  its  entire  simplicity  and 
artlessness,  shows  itself  especially  in  the  episode 
concerning  Gideon.  In  order  to  emphasize  the 
contrast  which  they  present  to  the  scanty  means  of 
Israel — the  handful  of  men  who  followed  Gideon 
—  the  countless  numbers  and  vast  resources  of  the 
enemy  are  once  more  pointed  out.  On  one  side, 
there  are  three  hundred  men,  on  foot ;  on  the  other, 
a  multitude  numerous  as  an  army  of  locusts,  riders 
on  camels  countless  as  the  sands  of  the  sea-shore 
(cf.  above,  on  ch.  vi.  5).  This  contrast  must  needs 
be  insisted  on  here,  that  so  the  wonderful  help  of 
God  may  stand  out  in  bold  relief ;  that  Israel  may 
learn  that  victory  comes  not  of  numbers,  but  is 
the  gift  of  God,  and  that  in  all  their  conflicts,  it  is 
the  spirit  of  God  who  endows  their  enemies  with 
victorious  courage,  that  He  may  chasten  his  people, 
or  fills  them  with  fear  and  confusion,  notwithstand- 
ing their  multitude  and  might,  that  Israel  may  be 
delivered.  God  governs  man's  free  will.  He  turns 
the  hearts  of  men  according  to  his  wisdom.  He 
raises  the  courage  of  the  few  and  small  to  victory, 
and  brings  the  proud  and  great  to  grief.  It  is  his 
work  that  Gideon  with  three  hundred  men  dares 
attack  the  enormous  multitude  ;  his  doing  that,  as 
the  soldier's  dream  and  its  interpretation  indicate, 
sad  forebodings  fill  the  heart  of  the  proud  and 
mighty  foe,  and  cause  it  to  faint  before  the  com- 
ing conflict. 

Ver.  13.  And  as  Gideon  came,  behold,  a  man 
told  a  dream.  From  the  enemy's  dream,  Gideon 
will  learn  the  frame  of  mind  in  which  they  are. 
For  this  end  he  was  to  go  into  the  encampment, 
thereby  to  perfect  his  own  confidence.  Jehovah  is 
God  of  the  heathen  also.  Although  they  do  not 
believe  in  Him,  they  are  yet  instruments  in  his 
hand.  It  was  He  who,  without  their  knowing  it, 
raised  them  up  and  directed  their  way.  They  did 
not  learn  to  know  Him  from  his  works ;  and  yet  He 
shone  above  them,  like  the  sun  concealed  by  clouds 
ar.d  vapors.  The  manifest  God  they  fail  to  see  by 
day ;  but  the  Hidden  and  Unknown  they  seek  in 
dreams.  All  heathenism  is,  to  a  certain  extent,  a 
great  dream ;  and  it  is  in  accordance  with  its 
nature,  that  as  all  nations  dream,  so  all  are  dis- 
posed to  find  in  dreams  the  indications  of  a  hidden 
truth.  Their  interpreters  did  not  know  the  God 
of  Truth  in  himself;  but  He  who  turns  the  nations 
as  water-courses,  fills  their  hearts,  when  He  pleases, 
with  visions  and  interpretations  which  have  their 
rise  in  truth.  Hence,  when  in  Scripture,  God  fre- 
quently favors  heathen  with  dreams  of  truth,  He 
does  not  thereby  sanctify  every  dream ;  but  only 
uses  dreams  to  influence  the  men  whom  He  takes 
under  the  guidance  of  his  wisdom,  —  the  Philistine 
king,  for  instance,  Laban  the  Aramaean,  the  Egyp- 
tian baker  and  butler,  —  because  they  already  look 
on  dreams  as  such  as  hiding  a  divine  mystery. 
Dreams  appeared  the  more  significant,  when  great 
events  were  manifestly  at  hand.  And  in  the  condi- 
tion of  mental  excitement  which  under  such  circum- 
stances seizes  on  men,  they  are  natural  and  to  be 
expected.  Thus  elsewhere  also  we  hear  of  dreams 
by  generals  before  battle.  Leonidas,  Plutarch  (on 
Herodotus)  tells  us,  had  a  dream  before  the  battle 

1  Josephus  also  understands  it  thus  :  ft  avBptoTrot^  aftpui- 
foi»."  His  further  interpretation,  however,  can  scarcely  be 
followed. 

2  [Cf.  Thomson.  The  Land  and  the  Book,  ii.  166 Te.] 

•  [Wordsworth  :  "  The  tent  was  an  expressive  emblem 


of  Thermopylae,  which  disclosed  to  him  the  future 
destinies  of  Greece  and  Thebes.  Xerxes  had  a 
dream  previous  to  his  Greek  campaign  ;  and  Gus- 
t.ivus  Adolphus  is  said  to  have  dreamed  before  the 
battle  of  Leipzig,  that  he  was  wrestling  with  Tilly 
(Joh.  Schett'er,  Sfemorab.  Suet.  Gentis,  p.  23).  It 
was  not  unknown  to  the  Midianites  that  Gideon, 
though  but  a  contemned  foe,  lay  encamped  on  the 
mountain.  The  peculiar  dream  must  therefore  the 
more  impress  the  soldier  who  dreamed  it. 

A  round  barley-loaf  rolled  itself.  The  narra- 
tive, notwithstanding  its  simplicity  and  brevity,  is 

very  vivid  and  forcible.  The  animated  i"!3n  recurs 
three  times.  The  dream  itself  also  portrays  the 
contrast  with  which  it  has  to  do,  with  uncommon 
clearness.  The  barley-loaf  is  the  symbol  of  wretch- 
edness and  poverty,1  over  against  the  luxurv  and 
wealth  of  Midian.  Indigent  Bedouins,  who  have 
nothing  else,  at  this  day  still  subsist  on  barley- 
bread,  which  they  sometimes  dip  in  goat's  fat 
(Ritter,  xiv.  1003).2     The  cake   or   loaf  is   here 

called    'V?>  a   term   variously  explained.     The 

definition  of  Gesenius,  who  derives  it  from    '7^? 

=  ' /|,  to  roll,  seems  to  be  the  most  likely.  The 
mention  of  the  round  form  of  the  loaf  was  neces 
sary  to  bring  its  rolling  vividly  before  the  imag- 
ination, since  all  loaves  were  not  round.  The 
Aral  is  of  the  desert,  according  to  Niebuhr,  take  a 
round  lump  of  dough,  and  bury  it  in  hot  coals, 
until  they  think  it  baked.  Then  they  knock  oflf 
the  ashes,  and  eat  it  {Beschreib.  Arab.  p.  52). 
Such  a  wretched  loaf  is  that  which  the  Mid- 
ianite  sees  rolling  in  his  dream.  It  signifies 
Gideon  and  Israel,  who,  by  reason  of  their  ene- 
mies, were  reduced  to  poverty  and  distress  (ch. 
vi.  4).  It  comes  rolling  "against"  the  encamp- 
ment C'Snn?),  not  "  in "  it,  as  the  expositors 
have  it;  for  the  dream  depicts  the  coming  event. 

And  it  eame  to  the  tent,  vHSH  IV.  The 
tent — with  the  article.  It  would  be  an  error  to 
think  here,  with  Bertheau,  who  follows  Josephus, 
of  the  tent  of  the  king  ;  for  there  were  several 
kings.  The  tent  of  the  dream  stands  collectively 
for  all  the  tents  of  the  encampment ;  for  the  very 
idea  of  the  dream  is  that  the  rolling  loaf  comes 
into  collision  with  the  tents  in  general.  One  tent 
after  another  is  struck  by  it,  falls,  and  is  turned 

upside  down.  'U^^  '-J"!i  and  "  the  tent,"  al" 
the  tents,  one  after  another,  lay  overturned.  Bj 
this  venaphal,  the  narrator  recapitulates,  as  it  were 
the  foiling  of  the  several  tents,  which  in  the  vivid 
dream  vision,  in  which  all  notions  of  time  and 
space  are  forgotten,  appeared  like  the  downfall  of 
a  single  tent? 

Ver.  14.  And  his  fellow  answered.  The  fact 
that  a  true  interpretation  is  given  by  one  comrade 
to  the  other,  must  be  specially  noted.  The  first 
has  not  asked,  but  only  related;  the  other  is  no 
sooth-sayer,  but  only  a  companion.  So  much  the 
more  significant  is  the  frame  of  mind  in  which  the 
interpretation  originates.  For  there  exists  no  visi- 
ble ground  for  thinking  it  possible  that,  notwith- 
standing their  great  power,  Midian  may  be  deliv- 
ered into  the  hands  of  a  man  like  Gideon.     But 

of  the  Midianites,  being  nomads  ;  their  tent  was  their  all 
in  ail.  Their  wives,  their  children,  their  cattle,  their  goods 
their  vesture,  their  treasure,  were  all  collected  Id  it  aac* 
abont  it."  —  Ta.] 


128 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


ivhat  does  exist,  is  an  evil  conscience.  Through 
seven  years  Midian  had  plundered  and  trodden 
Israel.  This  is  the  first  time,  in  all  these  years, 
that  resistance  is  attempted.  That  in  spite  of  dis- 
tress and  numerical  weakness,  Israel  ventures  now 
to  begin  a  war,  must  of  itself  excite  attention  and 
make  an  impression.  How  long  had  it  been,  since 
Israel  had  unfurled  the  banners  of  its  God  !  Proud 
tvranny  is  already  startled  at  the  prospect  of  resist- 
ance from  a  few  faithful  ones.1  According  to 
Herodotus  (vii.  16),  Artaban  says  to  Xerxes  :  "  Men 
are  wont  to  be  visited  in  sleep  by  images  of  what 
they  have  thought  on  during  the  day."  The  prin- 
ciple applies  in  this  case  to  both  dreamer  and  in- 
terpreter. Dream  and  interpretation  both  reflect 
the  forebodings  of  an  evil  conscience,  which  God 
is  about  to  judge.  The  interpreter  compares  the 
rolling  loaf  with  the  sword  of  Gideon.     (The  hith- 

pael  of  T[2n,  here  applied  to  that  which  symbol- 
ized the  sword  of  Gideon  (ver.  13),  is  also  used  by 
the  sacred  writer  of  the  sword  which  kept  the  en- 
trance to  the  garden  of  Eden.  Gen.  iii.  24.)  He 
it  is  —  continues  the  interpreter  —  who  rises  up 
against  the  domination  of  Midian  :  does  he  venture 
on  this,  and  dreamest  thou  thus,  —  be  sure  that  his 
God  (hence  the  article  with  Elohim,  since  without 
the  article  it  also  designates  their  gods)  has  deliv- 
ered Midian  into  his  power. 

Ver.  15.  'When  Gideon  heard  this.  What 
Gideon  hears  is  not  merely  the  interpretation  of  a 
dream  which  confirms  his  brightest  hopes.  The 
dream  is  one  which  his  enemies  have,  and  the  in- 
terpretation is  their  own.  He  hears  in  it  an  ex- 
pression of  the  tone  and  mood  of  their  minds.  He 
learns  that  the  confidence  of  the  enemy  is  already 
broken  by  the  reflection  that  Israel's  Lord  is  once 
more  in  the  field.  Astonished  and  adoring,  he  and 
his  attendant  hear  this  wonder,  as  great  and  real  as 
any  other  that  God  has  shown  him.  They  feel  that 
God  lias  done  this  —  they  see  that  He  is  leader  and 
victor  —  with  thanksgiving  they  bow  before  Him.3 

Vers.  16-18.  And  he  divided  the  three  hun- 
dred men.  Encouraged,  Gideon  hastens  to  act. 
He  divides  his  band  into  three  companies,  so  as  to 
be  able  to  surround  the  hostile  encampment  (cf. 
ver.  21).  He  bids  the  two  companies  who  are  to 
take  their  stations  on  the  other  sides,  to  attend  to 
his  signal,  and  gives  them  the  battle-cry.  Now,  as 
to  this  cry,  though  ver.  18  gives  it,  "  Of  Jehovah 
and  of  Gideon,"  yet,  since  ver.  20  has,  "  Sword  of 
Jehovah  and  of  Gideon,"  it  is  evident  that  in  the 
former  verse  the  word  "  sword  "  is  to  be  supplied. 
For  the  two  companies  who  were  to  wait  tor  the 
trumpet-blast  of  Gideon  and  those  with  him,  could 
not  understand  the  words  of  the  distant  cry,  and 

1  JSschylus  (Per.stp,  1SS,  etc.)  represents  poetically  the 
forebodings  and  dreams  of  Atossa  concerning  the  impeud- 
*ng  disaster  of  Xerxes  ;  but  the  moral  view,  that  such 
dreams  were  inspired  by  the  evil  conscience  of  the  conquest- 
loving  tyrant,  and  that  the  insignificant  people  triumphed 
through  God,  is  wanting. 

■2  [Our  author  treats  ^nntt^l  as  a  plural,  and  trans- 
lates :  "  t/tey  worshipped."  The  form  is  undoubtedly  singu- 
lar, cf.  Gen.  xxiii.  7;  xxiv.  52;  etc.,  and  is  so  regarded  by- 
most  grammarians.  Ges.  Grain.  75  Rem.  18  ;  Green,  176,  1 
Fiirst,  however,  both  in  his  Lexicon  and  in  his  Hebrew 
Concordance    treats   it  as    plural.     In    his   Lexicon,    5.    v. 

nflt^,      he    says :     (t  HlPi-ltE^  i     plural,    sometimes 

Tnrnt£>>,  in  pause  ^nFltP\  sometimes  !\inplK7''."  — 
Te.] 

3  [Dr.  Thomson  remarks  (i.  §■  B.  ii.  166) :  "  I  have  often 
Men  the  small  oil  lamp  of  the  natives  carried  in  a  f  pitcher  ' 


yet  they  also  shouted,  "  Sword  of  Jehovah  and  of 
Gideon  "  (ver.  20).  Moreover,  the  command  must 
have  been  executed  as  it  was  given  ;  and  hence  the 
fact  that  according  to  ver.  20  Gideon's  own  com- 
pany joined  in  the  longer  form,  proves  that  to  have 
been  originally  given.  The  cry  itself  is  very  ex- 
prcssive.  It  tells  the  Midianites  that  the  sword  of 
the  God  whose  people  and  faith  they  have  op- 
pressed, and  of  the  man  whose  insignificance  they 
have  despised,  whose  family  they  have  injured,  und 
who  through  God  becomes  their  conqueror,  is  about 
to  be  swung  over  their  heads. 

Vera.  19-21.  And  Gideon  came  to  the  border 
line  of  the  camp  about  the  beginning  of  the 
middle  watch.  From  the  mention  of  the  middle 
watch,  it  has  been  justly  inferred  that  the  night 
must  be  considered  as  divided  into  three  watches. 
It  was  still  deep  in  the  night  when  Gideon  under 
took  the  surprise.  The  middle  watch  was  just 
begun  ;  the  sentinels,  it  is  added,  with  good  rea- 
son, had  just  (^T^)  been  set  —  for  as  the  middle 
watch  advanced,  the  army  would  begin  to  stir 
Prodigious  was  the  alarm  that  seized  on  Midian, 
when  suddenly  the  trumpets  clanged,  the  pitchers 
crashed,  the  thundering  battle-cry  broke  out,  the 

torches3   blazed Accounts    are    not 

wanting  in  the  history  of  other  nations,  of  similar 
stratagems  adopted  by  bold  generals.  Tacitus  ex- 
presses himself  on  this  subject  after  his  own  man- 
ner (Annal.  i.  68,  4) :  "  The  clangor  of  trumpets 
and  the  glitter  of  arms  (sontts  tubaruin,fulgor  armo- 
rum)  easily  become  destructive  to  a  foe  who  thinks 
only  of  a  few,  half-armed  opponents ;  the  more 
unexpected  the  alarm,  the  greater  the  loss  (cade- 
bant  ut  rebus  secundis  avidi,  ita  adversis  incauti)." 
So  the  Roman  Minucius  Rufus  terrified  the  Scor- 
disci,  by  causing  trumpets  to  be  blown  from  among 
the  mountains  round  about,  the  sound  of  which, 
echoed  by  the  rocks,  spread  fear  and  terror  (Fron- 
tinus,  Stratagematicon,  ii.  3).  The  ancients  named 
such  surprises  Panic  terrors,  because  Pan  put  the 
enemies  of  Dionysus  to  flight  with  his  horns4  (cf 
Polyrenus,  Stnitegem.  i.  and  ii.). 

The  terror  which  seized  on  Midian  was  in  truth 
a  terror  from  God.  This  the  simple  narrative 
sets  forth  most  classically.  Ver.  16  had  already 
stated  that  all  had  trumpets  in  their  hands,  and 
pitchers,  with  torches,  whereby  no  hand  was  left 
free  to  use  the  sword.  Ver.  20  says,  still  more 
explicitly,  "  they  had  the  torches  in  their  left,  and 
the  trumpets  in  their  right  hands."  They  did  not 
use  the  sword,  but  only  cried,  "  Sword  of  Jehovah 
and  of  Gideon."     (Not,  however,  as  if  Gideon  were 

put  on   a   parallel  with  God:   pS"^?^  is  to  be 

or  earthern  vessel  at  night."     But  the  ^^2^  of  thii 

history  can  scarcely  be  H  oil  lamps,"  for  which  nTTD 
would  be  more  appropriate.  A  better  explanation  is  sug- 
gested by  the  following  note  in  Smith's  Bible  Diet.  (Art. 
Gideon) :  tf  It  is  curious  to  find  '  lamps  and  pitchers  '  in  use 
for  a  similar  purpose  at  this  very  day  in  the  streets  of 
Cairo.  The  Zabit  or  Azha  of  the  police  carries  with  him 
at  night,  *a  torch  which  burns,  soon  after  it  is  lighted, 
without  a  flame,  excepting  when  it  is  waved  through  the 
air,  when  it  suddenly  blazes  forth  ;  it  therefore  answers  the 
same  purpose  as  our  dark  lantern.  The  burning  end  u 
sorm  rimes  concealed  in  a  smnii  pot  or  jar,  or  covered  with 
something  else,  when  not  required  to  give  light  (Lane,  Mod 
Egypt.,  i.  ch.  iv.).'  "— Tr.] 

4  A  similar  maneuver  terrified  the  inhabitants  of  Her* 
seum  in  Actaaia,  when  Diotas  besieged  them.  Polysenus, 
ii.  36. 


CHAPTER    VII.    12-25. 


12S 


taken  as  supplementing  the  preceding  words  — 
''  even  that  committed  to  Gideon  ;  "  for  Gideon  was 
the  visible  bearer  of  God's  sword.)  Hence,  also, 
ver.  21  says  :  "  They  stood  (the  troops  of  Gideon) 
round  about  the  encampment;  "  ;'.  e.,  they  stand, 
not  otherwise  attacking,  but  simply  blowing  their 
trumpets;    yet   the   enemy   takes   to    "running" 

(V7t-  staU(is  contrasted  with  TlCl'*!).  Just  as 
in  Joshua's  time  the  walls  of  Jericho  fell,  while 
the  trumpets  of  Israel  sounded,  so  here  it  is — ' 
"  These  blew,  those  fled."  Terror  and  disorder 
ruled  the  hour  in  the  Midianitish  camp.  In  the 
darkness  and  confusion,  they  no  longer  knew  what 
they  did.  Hence,  ver.  22  states  that  "while  the 
three  hundred  blew  the  trumpets"  —  this  is  inten- 
tionally repeated,  and  shows  that  they  scarcely 
needed  a  sword  against  Midian  —  the  Midianites 
thought  themselves  attacked  by  enemies,  and  raged 
among  themselves,  for  "Jehovah  had  set  every 
man's  sword  against  his  fellow,  and  against  the 
whole  camp,"  or  as  we  say,  in  cases  of  great  con- 
fusion, "  All  against  one,  one  against  all." 

Ver.  22.  And  the  host  fled  to  Beth-shittah 
(the  House  of  Acacias),  towards  Zererah,  to 
the  edge  of  Abel-meholah,  near  Tabbath.  The 
direction  of  the  flight,  and  the  situation  of  the 
places  named,  can  only  be  inferred  from  the  con- 
nection and  from  a  comparison  of  other  passages. 
The  mention  of  the  places  must  have  had  a  local 
significance  for  the  reader  who  was  acquainted  with 
their  situation.  From  ch.  viii.  we  learn  that  the 
Midianites  did  not  flee  in  one  body,  but  in  several 
divisions.  This  is  as  might  be  expected,  seeing 
the  army  was  composed  of  different  tribes  —  Mid- 
ianites, Amalekites,  and  "  Sons  of  the  East." 
This  separation  in  flight  is  also  indicated  by  the 
statement  of  the  places  to  which  they  fled.  .First, 
they  are  said  to  have  fled  "  to  Beth-shittah,  towards 
Zererah,"  by  which  one  line  of  flight  is  given. 
When  it  is  further  said  that  they  fled  "  to  the  edge 
of  Abel-meholah,  near  Tabbath,"  the  intention 
cannot  be  to  prolong  the  first  line,  which  is  already 
terminated  by  the  phrase  "  towards  Zererah,"  but 
a  second  is  indicated.  This  also  explains  the 
measures  adopted  by  Gideon.  Being  unable  to 
follow  both  himself,  he  calls  on  Ephraim  to  cut  off 
the  other  line  of  flight.  The  enemy's  effort  was 
to  gain  the  fords  of  the  Jordan.  That  one  through 
which  kings  Zebah  and  Zalmunna  must  have 
passed  (ch.  viii.  5),  seeing  they  had  the  start  of  the 

others,  is  evidently  indicated  by  nrnnSi  "  to- 
wards Zererah."  Many  codices  have  ^ti^H^^' 
'  toward  Zeredah,"  dalelh  being  substituted  for 
resh.  Kimchi,  however,  expressly  calls  attention 
to  the  two  r's.  But  even  in  the  earliest  times 
Zeredah  was  read  instead  of  Zererah,  as  appears 

from  2  Chron.  iv.  17,  where  we  find  niH^IS. 
From  the  same  passage  compared  with  1  Kgs.  vii. 
46,  it  is  evident  that  Zeredah  was  identified  with 

1'THV-  Zorthan.  From  both  it  appears  to  have 
•>een  situated  in  the  vicinity  of  the  Jordan,  not 
7ervfar  from  Beth-shean  (Beisan) ;  and  from  Josh. 
*i.  15,  16,  it  may  lie  inferred  that  near  it  there  was 
•  ford  through  the  river.  This  explains  why 
Midian  took  this  line.  They  approached  the  river 
from  the  direction  of  Beth-shittah.  Bertheau  did 
well  to  connect  this  place  with  the  modern  village 
Shutta,  mentioned  by  Robinson  (ii.  356),  and  sit- 
uateil  in  the  vicinity  of  Beth-shean.  Keifs  ob- 
jection that  it  lies  north  of  Gilboa,  is  of  no  force 
nmler  our  view  of  the  localities  as  above  indicated. 


Zorthan  (Zarthan)  is  mentioned  in  connection  with 
a  Succoth  on  this  side  the  Jordan  (1  Kgs.  vii.  46). 
To  this  day  the  Jordan  is  passed  near  some  ruins, 
not  far  from  Beisan,  which  are  supposed  to  indi- 
cate the  site  of  Succoth  (Ritter,  xv.  446).  The 
other  line  of  fugitives  took  a  more  southerly  direc- 
tion, "towards  the  edge  of  Abel-meholah."  The 
name  of  this  place,  celebrated  as  the  birth-place  of 
the  prophet  Elisha,  has  been  preserved  in  the 
Onomasticon  of  Eusebius  as  A/3tA^a€/iai  (ed.  Par- 

they,  p.  8).  The  fact  that  a  ilCE?.  edge  or  strand, 
is  spoken  of,  indicates  perhaps  the  presence  of  a 
wady.  And  in  tact,  coming  down  from  Beisan  or 
Z.  mi,  the  first  western  tributary  of  the  Jordan 
met  with,  is  a  Wady  el-Maleh  (cf.  Ritter,  xviii. 
432-448,  in  several  passages).  The  fugitives  are 
further  said  to  have  come  to  the  edge  of  Abel- 
meholah  "near  Tabbath."  There  is  still  a  city 
Tubas,  not  far  from  Wady  Maleh,  usually  consid- 
ered to  be  the  Thebez  of  the  history  of  Abimelech 
(ch.  ix.  50),  for  which,  however,  there  is  no  com- 
pulsory ground. 

Vers.  23-25.  Gideon  had  a  definite  plan  of  pur- 
suit. To  carry  it  out,  he  required  more  men  than 
the  three  hundred  who  had  stood  with  him  in  the 
victory.  The  troops  whom  he  had  collected  from 
Manasseh,  Asher,  Zebulun,  and  Naphtali  (ch.  vi. 
35),  though  subsequently  dismissed,  had  not  yet 
disbanded.  They  now  returned  (Zebulun  only  is 
not  named),  and  assisted  in  the  pursuit.  But  to 
overtake  the  Midianites  on  their  fleet  camels  was 
not  an  easy  matter.  If  not  intercepted,  those  of 
them  who  were  hastening  southward,  would  get  as 
safely  over  the  Jordan  as  kings  Zebah  and  Zal 
munnahad  done  near  Beisan  (at  Zorthan).  Gideon 
had  foreseen  this,  and  had  early  sent  a  message  to 
Ephraim,  over  whose  territory  the  fugitive  host 
was  passing,  to  "  seize  the  waters  as  far  as  Beth- 
barah  and  the  Jordan."  Ephraim  acted  promptly, 
and  a  part  of  the  Midianites  were  cut  oft".  The 
"  waters  "  can  only  mean  some  western  tributaries 
of  the  Jordan ;  for  Gideon's  object  is  to  prevent 
that  body  of  the  enemy  which  by  his  pursuit  he 
has  thus  far  kept  away  from  the  river,  from  gain- 
ing the  lower  fords  and  crossing  over.  He  there- 
fore desires  "  the  waters  "  to  be  seized  "  to  Beth- 
barah."  This  name  Beth-barah  cannot  well  have 
originated    from    Beth-abarah   (Ford-house).      It 

does    not   appear   that    the    letter     i?    has   been 

dropped  out  of  rn^SV^SJ.  Besides,  if  Beth-ba- 
rah meant  "  Ford-house,"  the  direction  "  to  Beth- 
barah  "  would  have  been  superfluous ;  lor  in  that 
case  the  seizure  of  the  Jordan  would  have  included 
that  of  the  "  waters  "  and  the  ford.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  was  important  to  provide  for  the  occupa- 
tion of  the  "  waters,"  or  the  particular  stream  in- 
tended, along  its  whole  length  to  its  source  ;  lest, 
while  it  was  guarded  below,  the  enemy  should  cross 
it  above.  Beth-barah  is  therefore,  with  Eusebius 
and  Jerome  {Onomast.,  p.  104),  to  be  explained  as 
"House    of    the    Spring,"    "Well-house"   (from 

"1S3  or  "Q),  by  which    the    narrative    becomei 

clear  and  intelligible.  Therewith,  also  fall  all  at- 
tempts to  identify  this  Beth-barah  with  the  Beth- 
abarah  of  Origen's  reading  at  John  i.  28  ;  for  that 
lay  beyond  the  Jordan.  Origen  was,  however,  led 
by  a  right  critical  feeling  Instead  of  a  Bethany, 
the  people  of  his  day  doubtless  spoke  of  a  Beth- 
abarah  in  that  region  ;  and  this,  philologically  and 
in  fact,  was  one  and  the  same  with  Bethany.  Foi 
this  trans-Jiirdanic  Bethanv —  not  to  be  confounded 


130 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


with  that  near  Jerusalem  —  is  to  be  derived  from 
Bttft-ain,  as  Beth-abarah  from  Beth-beer,  and  like 
the  latter  signifies  "House  of  the  Spring,''  —  a 
point  to  which  I  formerly  directed  attention  in  my 
"  Bericld  Ubtrr  Renan  (Berlin,  1*64). 

The  Ephraimites,  to  their  great  glory,  captured 
the  two  Midianite  princes  Orel)  and  Zeeb.  It  was 
the  reward  of  their  prompt  obedience.  Very  sug- 
gestive are  the  names,  under  which  these  two 
princes  of  the  desert  had  perhaps  been  especially 
dreaded  —  "  Wolf"  and  "  Raven."  Among  other 
nations  also,  these  animals,  frequenters  of  desolate 
places,  and  eager  attendants  on  battle-fields,  have 
furnished  surnames  for  noted  warriors.  The 
Arabs,  because  the  raven  follows  in  the  wake  of 
caravans,  call  him  Ebal-Mirkal,  Father  of  the 
Swift  Camel,  or  Ibn-B'rsun,  Son  of  the  Sumpter- 
horse.  Noteworthy,  at  all  events,  is  the  conjunc- 
tion of  "  Raven  and  Wolf."  Coupled  in  the  same 
way,  we  find  them  sacred  to  the  Scandinavian 
Odin.  Both  ravens  and  wolves  were  also  conse- 
crated to  Apollo.  In  the  early  Roman  legends  the 
woodpecker  (pictts)  takes  the  place  of  the  raven 
as  companion  of  the  wolf,  and  both  belong  to  the 
God  of  War  (ef.  my  Sctiamir,  Erf.  1856,  p.  103). 
The  Arabs  give  to  both  the  bird  and  the  quad- 
ruped the  common  name  Ibnol-Erdh,  Son  of  the 
Earth  (Hammer,  Namen  der  Aratier,  p.  48). 

The  fame  of  the  deed  perpetuated  itself  in  local 
designations,  and  the  Raven's  Rock  and  Wolfs 
Wine-press  commemorate  the  disgrace  of  Midian. 
The  Odyssea  likewise  speaks  of  a  Raven's  rock 
in  Ithaca  (xiii.  408),  which  name  the  scholiast 
derives  from  a  fallen  hunter  (cf.  Bochart,  Hiero- 
zoicon,  ii.  203  )  ;  and  the  use  of  the  German  Raben- 
slein}    is  undeniably   analogous.      In    the    other 

name,  the  term  jekeb  (3|7.'\  wine-press)  is  borrowed 
f.  om  the  hollow  form  of  the  object ;  hence,  the 
name  is  here  equivalent  to  Wolf's-hole.  Similar 
historical  allusions  are  supposed  by  the  German 
Muse  to  lie  concealed  in  Worms  (from  Wurme, 
slain  by  Siegfried)  and  in  Drachenfels  (cf.  Grimm, 
D.  Heldens.,  pp.  155,  316). 

In  Hauran,  Wetzstein  heard  the  name  el-Gurab, 
the  Raven,  applied  to  a  spent  volcano  (p.  16)  ;  and 
Castle  Kerek,  at  the  south  end  of  the  Dead  Sea, 
was  called  Hisnal-gorab,  Raven's-castle  (Ritter, 
xiv.  1042). 

The  important  remark  in  ver.  25,  that  the  heads 
of  the  two  princes  were  brought  to  Gideon  "  from 
beyond  the  Jordan,"  induces  the  hope  that  the 
name  and  location  of  the  "  Raven's-rock  "  may  yet 
be  traced.  The  "  waters  "  which  Ephraim  occu- 
pied, must  have  been  those  now  known  as  Wady  el- 
Faria.  Below  this  wady,  there  is  to  this  day  a 
much  used  ford  (Ritter,  xv.  449)  ;  while  over 
against  it,  on  the  eastern  bank  of  the  Jordan,  there 
is  the  steep  height  of  Jebcl  Ajlun,  overlooking  the 
Ghor,  and  commanding  the  confluent  valleys  ( Rit- 
ter, xv.  369).  On  this  height  there  are  the  ruins 
of  a  castle,  of  which  Ibrahim  Pasha  still  availed 
himself  to  hold  the  robber  hordes  in  check,  and 
which  (according  to  the  reports  of  various  travel- 
lers on  this  yet  but  imperfectly  known  locality) 
bore  the  name  of  Kalaat-er  Rabbad,  or  Rabua.  The 
Ephraimites,  charged  with  the  occupation  of  the 
.Jordan,  had  crossed  over  and  seized  on  this  im- 
portant point  in  order  fully  to  command  the  Jor- 
'lin  valley.  Here  they  captured  the  princes  "  Raven 
und  Wolf."  The  "  Raven's-rock  "  was  still  known 
by  this  name  in  the  time  of  Isaiah  (see  ch.  x.  26) ; 

1  A  place  of  this  name  occurs  in  Carinthia  as  early  as  the 
elevemn  century  (Forstemann,  ii.  768). 


and  in  the  corrupted  designation  Rabua,  a  sinr 
ilarity  of  sound  with  Oreb  or  Gorab  may  be  traced. 
The  exploit  was  swift  and  fortunate.  Gideon  in 
his  pursuit  was  still  on  this  side  of  the  Jordan ; 
while  he  was  making  a  halt  before  crossing  over, 
the  Ephraimites  were  already  returning  in  triumph 
from  the  opposite  shore,  bringing  with  them  the 
heads  of  the  slain  princes.  All  other  explanations, 
as  found  among  others  in  Bertheau  and  Keil  also, 
fail  to  harmonize  satisfactorily  with  the  connection. 
The  narrator  designedly  adds  the  words  "  from 
beyond  Jordan,"  that  the  reader  may  know  that 
Ephraim  had  gained  the  great  triumph,  before 
Gideon  could  so  much  as  cross  the  river.  This 
passing  remark  helps  to  prepare  the  reader  for  the 
opening  narrative  of  ch.  viii.  It  foreshadows  the 
pride  and  selfishness  of  Ephraim.  Finally,  that 
Ephraim  was  beyond  the  Jordan,  and  there  cap- 
tured the  hostile  chieftains,  is  evident  even  from  the 
words  (ver.  25),  "  they  pursued  Midian  ;  "  for  aa 
they  held  the  Jordan  and  "  the  waters,"  they  could 
only  pursue  those  who  had  passed  the  river. 


HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

After  his  first  victory  over  idolatry  in  his  father's 
house,  Gideon  has  courage  for  the  second,  over 
enemies  in  the  field.  He  seeks  the  few,  not  the 
many.  He  knows  that  help  comes  from  God, 
not  from  the  multitude ;  and  because  he  knows 
this,  he  conquers.  The  countless  host  of  enemies 
vanishes  like  dust  —  not  because  of  his  three  hun- 
dred :  the  terrors  of  God  dissolve  them,  and  turn 
them  against  each  other.  Doubtless,  Gideon  was 
also  a  hero  of  the  sword  ;  but  first  God's  deed  — 
then  man's.  Therefore  he  succeeds  in  everything, 
from  first  to  last.  Gideon  is  not  envious  of  God, 
as  Ephraim  is  of  him.  To  God  belongs  the  glory, 
first  and  last. 

[Bp.  Hall  :  Now,  when  we  would  look  that 
Gideon  should  give  charge  of  whetting  their  swords, 
and  sharping  their  spears,  and  fitting  their  armor, 
he  only  gives  order  for  empty  pitchers,  and  lights, 
and  trumpets.  The  cracking  of  these  pitchers 
shall  break  in  pieces  this  Midianitish  clay ;  the 
kindling  of  these  lights  shall  extinguish  the  light 
of  Midian ;  these  trumpets  sound  no  other  than  a 
soul-peal  to  all  the  host  of  Midian  :  there  shall 
need  nothing  but  noise  and  light  to  confound  this 
innumerable  army.  And  if  the  pitchers,  and  brands, 
and  trumpets  of  Gideon,  did  so  daunt  and  dismay 
the  proud  troops  of  Midian  and  Amalek,  who  can 
we  think  shall  be  able  to  stand  before  the  last  ter- 
ror, wherein  the  trumpet  of  the  archangel  shall 
sound,  and  the  heavens  shall  pass  away  with  a 
noise,  and  the  elements  shall  be  on  a  flame  about 
our  ears  ?  —  The  same  :  Those  two  and  twenty 
thousand  Israelites  that  slipped  away  for  fear,  when 
the  fearful  Midianites  fled,  can  pursue  and  kill 
them,  and  can  follow  them  at  the  heels,  whom  they 
durst  not  look  at  in  the  face.  Our  flight  gives  ad- 
vantage to  the  feeblest  adversary,  whereas  our  re 
sistance  foileth  the  greatest.  —  Scott:  In  this 
world,  the  wicked  are  often  left  under  the  power 
of  their  own  delusions  and  the  fury  of  their  mad 
passions,  to  avenge  the  cause  of  God  on  each  other  : 
a  period  is  approaching,  when  we  may  expect  that 
the  persecuting  foes  of  Christianity  will  destroy  one 
another,  whilst  the  host  of  Israel  shall  look  on.  and 
have  nothing  to  do  but  to  blow  the  trumpet  of  the 
gospel. —  Wordsworth:  Gideon  las  only  three 
hundred  men,  and  Christ's  church  is  called  "  a  little 
flock,"  and  their  foes  are  innumerable ;  but  theii 


CHAPTER   VTII.     1-3. 


131 


eonntless  myriads  melt  away,  dispersed  by  the 
breath  of  God. —  The  same  :  The  prinees  of  Mid- 
ian  represent  the  spiritual  enemies  of  the  Church. 
Is  it  by  chance  that  they  were  called  Oreb,  the  Ra- 
ven, and  Zeeb,  the  Wolf?  The  Raven  is  contrasted 
with  the  Dove  in  the  history  of  the  Flood  (see 
Gen.  viii.  7)  as  an  unclean  bird  (cf.  Lev.  xi.  15) ;  and 
'n  the  N.  T.  the  Wolf  is  the  emblem  of  those  false 


teachers  who  tear  and  devour  the  flock  of  Christ.  — 
Theodoret  (as  quoted  by  Wordsworth)  :  Gideon 
overcame  Midian  with  unarmed  soldiers,  bearing 
only  trumpets,  torches,  and  pitchers.  So  Christ 
overcame  the  world  by  unarmed  apostles,  bearing 
the  trumpet  of  preaching  and  the  torch  of  miracles 
-Tb.1 


Ephraim 's  proud  complaint  and  Gideon's  wise  forbearance. 
Chapter  VIII.  1-3. 


3 


1  And  the  men  of  Ephraim  said  unto  him,  Why  hast  thou  served  us  thus,  that  thou 
calledst  us  not  when  [didst  not  call  out 1  to  us  that]  thou  wentest  [wast  going]  to 
tight  with  [against]  the  Midianites  ?  and  they  did  chide  [quarrel]  with  him  sharply 

2  [vehemently].  And  he  said  unto  them,  What  have  I  done  now  in  comparison  of 
you  'i  Is  not  the  gleaning  of  the  grapes  [omit :  of  the  grapes]  of  Ephraim  better 
than  the  vintage  of  Abi-ezer  ?  God  hath  delivered  into  your  hands  2  the  princes  of 
Midian,  Oreb  and  Zeeb :  and  what  was  I  able  to  do  in  comparison  of  you  ?  Then 
their  anger  [excitement]  s  was  [omit :  was]  abated  toward  [against]  him,  when  he 
had  [omit :  had]  said  that. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

1  Ver    1  n!D7n  N3   *C  •  im."0|?  ''^w^^       It  is  not  necessary  to  take  ^3   in  a  temporal  sense,  which  at 

t  :  -  t      •         t  ':•:■: 

all  events  it  has  very  seldom.     The  nl^"^|7   is  followed  by  the  objective  clause  of  that  which  the  persons  addressed 

are  notified  of. 

[2  Ver.  3.  —  « Into  your  hands,"  with  emphasis.     Hence  the  Hebrew  puts  it  first :  "  Into  your  hands  (lit.  hand)  God 
fare  the  princes  of  Midian,"  etc. — Ta.J 

8  Ver.  3.  —  Cn^  nn2^,  like  P^S  j   ^"^n,   Ps.  xxxvii.  8.      TVH  denotes  violent,  panting  excitement 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

In  his  dealing  with  puffed-up  Ephraim,  even 
more  than  by  his  victories,  Gideon  approves  him- 
self as  a  true  warrior  of  God,  wiser  in  his  humility 
than  his  dazzled  countrymen  in  their  pride.  The 
service  rendered  by  Ephraim  in  slaying  Oreb  and 
Zeeb,  was  after  all  of  but  secondary  merit.  They 
had  only  smitten  an  already  shattered  and  terri- 
fied enemy  :  had  only  captured  the  game  which 
another  had  chased  into  their  hands.  Where  was 
Ephraim  when  Midian  in  full  force  encamped  him- 
self in  the  country  ?  But  inferior  merit  is  the  more 
arrogant.  The  tribe  is  so  intoxicated  by  the  easy 
victory  over  the  two  princes,  that  it  presumes  to 
reprimand  Gideon  for  beginning  a  war  without 
them,  and  thus  undertaking  to  deprive  them  of  the 
laurels  which  thev  would  certainly  have  won.  So 
little  does  Ephraim  understand  the  true  strength 
viith  which  Israel  has  conquered,  that  he  accounts 
it  an  insult  to  himself  on  the  part  of  the  smaller 
Iribe  to  have  conquered  without  him.  The  pride 
of  the  mighty  men  ol  the  world  could  not  be  more 
clearly  depicted.  They  contend  with  him  vehe- 
mently (HiTtna),  just  as  the  men  of  Nineveh,  re- 
penting, "  cry  vehemently  "  ('T^T'7?>  Jon.  iii.  8) 
unto  God.  They  address  the  great  hero  fiercely 
and  vociferously.  His  answer  is  admirable.  He 
might  have  humbled  them  by  a  few  words  about 


his  deed  ;  but  he  will  have  no  strife  where  Israel 
needs  unity.  He  says  nothing  of  his  own  great 
victory.  He  does  not  irritate  them  by  referring  to 
their  previous  inactivity,  although  their  tribe  was 
so  great ;  or  by  reminding  them  that  after  all  he 
had  sent  them  the  word  which  enabled  them  to 
capture  an  enemy  whom  he  was  pursuing.  On 
the  contrary,  he  quiets  them  by  extolling  their 
great  merits'.  He  may  not  conceal  that  the  victory 
was  gained  without  them  ;  but,  his  vintage,  is  it 
not  less  than  their  gleaning  ?  What  comparison 
is  there  between  his  spoils  and  theirs  1  He,  still  on 
this  side  the  Jordan  ;  they,  already  adorned  with 
the  trophies  of  the  "  Raven  and  Wolf!"  He  lets 
them  know,  however,  who  it  is  that  really  gives 
victory,  namely  Elohim.  But  here  also  the  nice 
discrimination  shows  itself,  with  which  the  terms 
Jehovah,  ha-Elohim,  and  Elohim  alternate,  ac- 
cording to  the  spiritual  position  of  the  persons  ad 
dressed  or  spoken  of.  To  Ephraim,  Gideon  says 
that  Elohim  gave  them  victory  —  as  he  sometimes 
gives  it  even  to  heathen.  He  uses  this  term  be 
cause  they  lacked  humility  and  faith  to  know  that 
Jehovah,  "ha-Elohim,  the  true  God  of  Israel,  gives 
strength  to  his  people,  and  that,  thus  endowed,  il 
is  of  no  consequence  whether  the  militant  tribe  be 
great  or  small  (cf.  ver.  6,  etc.). 

■What  have  I  done  now  in  comparison  with 
you?  The  vain  tribe,  which  only  smarted  at  the 
thought  that  an  insignificant  member  of  ManasseV 


132 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


should  reap  greater  glory  than  Ephraim,  is  quieted 
when  this  person  himself  disclaims  the  glory. 
Vanity  that  prides  itself  on  seeming  merits,  is  al- 
ways contracted.  The  Ephraimites  do  not  under- 
stand the  modesty  of  Gideon,  which,  in  denying, 
as  it  were,  his  own  real  merits,  necessarily  pours 
the  contempt  of  irony  on  their  pretended  deserts. 
But  Gideon's  object  is  gained.  They  allow  them- 
selves to  he  pacified,  and  go  home  to  bask  them- 
selves in  the  sunshine  of  their  achievements.  Gid- 
eon, for  his  part,  teaches  that  victory  alone  does 
not  suffice  to  save  a  people ;  but  that  he  is  the  real 
hero  who  is  truly  humble,  and  for  the  sake  of  peace 
overcomes  himself.  To  conquer,  he  must  know 
how  to  bend. 

The  narrative  stands  here  in  its  proper  place. 
It  does  not  presuppose  anything  that  happened 
later ;  but  connects,  historically  and  morally,  what 
goes  before  and  what  follows  after.  Gideon  is  still 
in  the  midst  of  his  campaign,  when  Ephraim 
attacks  him  with  its  pride.  But  his  subsequent 
career  of  victory,  speaks  louder  than  envy.  Tne 
statement  of  Josephus  {Ant.  v.  6,  6),  that  Ephraim 
was  afterwards  punished  for  its  pride,  rests  on  no 
Scriptural  authority  ;  but  the  confusion  to  which 
they  are  put  by  the  subsequent  deeds  of  Gideon,  to 
whom  after  all  they  were  indebted  for  their  own 
achievement  also,  is  a  discipline  of  the  sharpest 
kind. 

H05HLETICAL   AND   PRACTICAL. 

Ephraim  is  jealous  of  Gideon.  Jealousy  is  a 
quality  which  only  seeks  its  own.  It  is  a  charac- 
teristic of  unbelief,  which  envies  God  his  power  and 
love 

Starke  :  He  acts  wisely,  who  prefers  to  forego 
6omewhat  of  his  own  rights,  rather  than  by  a  con- 
trary course  to  invite  the  opposition  of  others,  and 
bo  debar  himself  from  attaining  a  greater  good.  — 


Gerlach  :  Gideon's  answer,  as  modest  as  it  was 
prudent,  quiets  the  Ephraimites.  He  appears  here, 
as  afterwards,  as  a  high-minded  man,  free  from  low 
ambition  and  domineering  tendencies. 

[Bp.  Hall:  I  did  not  hear  the  Ephraimites 
offering  themselves  into  the  front  of  the  army  be- 
fore the  fight,  and  now  they  are  ready  to  fight  with 
Gideon  because  they  were  not  called  to  fight  with 
Midian  :  I  hear  them  expostulating  after  it.  After 
the  exploit  done,  cowards  are  valiant.  Their  quar- 
rel was,  that  they  were  not  called.  It  had  been  a 
greater  praise  of  their  valor  to  have  gone  unbidden 
.  .  .  .  None  speak  so  big  in  the  end  of  the  fray  as 
the  fearfullest.  —  The  same:  Ephraim  flies  upon 
Gideon,  whilst  the  Midianites  fly  from  him  ;  when 
Gideon  should  be  pursuing  his  enemies,  lie  is  pur- 
sued by  brethren,  and  now  is  glad  to  spend  that 
wind  in  pacifying  of  his  own,  which  should  have 
been  bestowed  in  the  slaughter  of  a  common  ad- 
versary. It  is  a  wonder  if  Satan  surfer  us  to  be 
quiet  at  home,  whilst  we  are  exercised  with  wars 
abroad.  Had  not  Gideon  learned  to  speak  fair,  as 
well  as  to  smite,  he  had  found  work  enough  from 
the  swords  of  Joseph's  sons  ;  his  good  words  are  as 
victorious  as  his  sword;  his  pacification  of  friends, 
better  than  his  execution  of  enemies.  —  Scott  :  In 
those  things  which  pertain  to  the  truth,  authority, 
and  glory  of  God,  Christians  should  be  unmoved 
as  the  sturdy  oak  ;  but  in  the  little  concerns  of 
their  own  interest  or  reputation,  they  should  re- 
semble the  pliant  willow,  that  yields  to  every  gust. 
—  Henry  :  Very  great  and  good  men  must  expect 
to  have  their  patience  tried,  by  the  unkindnesses 
and  follies  even  of  those  they  serve,  and  must  not 
think  it  strange.  —  Bush:  The  incidents  men- 
tioned afford  a  striking  illustration  of  two  emphatic 
declarations  of  Scripture :  1.  That  "  only  by  pride 
cometh  contention ; "  and,  2.  That  "  for  every 
right  work  a  man  is  envied  of  his  neighbor."  — 
Tr.] 


Succoth  and  Penuel  refuse  supplies  to  Gideon  while  in  pursuit  of  the  Midianitisk 

kings.     The  kings  surprised  and  captured.      The  punishment  of  the  traitorous 

cities  and  the  captured  kings. 

Chapter  VIII.     4-21. 


4  And  Gideon  came  to  [the]  Jordan,  and  passed  over,  he,  and  the  three  hundred 

5  men  that  were  with  him,  faint  [hungry],  yet  pursuing  them  [omit :  them].  And  he 
said  unto  the  men  of  Succoth,  Give,  I  pray  you,  loaves  of  bread  unto  the  people 
that  follow  me  :  for  they  be  faint  [hungry],  and  I  am  pursuing  after  Zebah  and  Zal- 

6  munna,  kings  of  Midian.  And  the  princes  of  Succoth  said,  Are  the  hands  of  Zebah 
and  Zalmunna  now  [already]  in  thine  hand,1  that  we  should  give  bread  unto  thine 

7  army  ?  And  Gideon  said,  Therefore  when  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  hath  delivered 
Zebah  and  Zalmunna  into  mine  hand,  then  I  will  tear  [thresh]  your  flesh  with  the 

8  [omit :  the]  thorns  of  the  wilderness  and  with  briers.  And  he  went  up  thence  to 
Penuel,  and  spake  unto  them  likewise :  and  the  men  of  Penuel  answered  him  as 

9  the  men  of  Succoth  had  answered  him.  And  he  spake  also  unto  the  men  of 
Penuel,  saying,  When  I  come  again   [return]  in   peace,  I  will  break  [tear]  down 

I  j  this  tower.  Now  Zebah  and  Zalmunna  were  in  Karkor,  and  their  hosts  [host]  2 
with  them,  about  fifteen  thousand  men,  all  that  were  left  of  all  the  hosts  [host]  of 
the  children  [sons]  of  the  east :  for  [and]  there  fell  [had  fallen]  an  hundred  ami 


CHAPTER   VTTI.   4-21.  13? 


11  twenty  thousand  men  that  drew  sword.  And  Gideon  went  up  by  the  way  of  them 
that  dwelt  [dwell]  in  tents  on  the  east  of  Nohah  and  Jogbehah,  and  smote  the  host  ■ 

12  for  [while]  the  host  was  [thought  itself]  secure.  And  when  [omit:  when]  Zebah  and 
Zalmnnna  fled,  [and]  he  pursued  after  them,  and  took  the  two  kings  of  Midian, 

13  Zebah  and  Zalmunna,  and  discomfited  [terrified]  all  the  host.  And  Gideon  the  son 
of  Joash  returned  from  [the]  battle  [war]  before  the  sun  was  up  [from  the  Ascent 

14  of  the  Sun].3  And  [he]  caught  a  young  man  [a  boy]  of  the  men  of  Succoth,  and 
inquired  of  him :  and  he  described  unto  [wrote  down  for]  him  the  princes  of  Suc- 

15  coth,  and  the  elders  thereof,  even  threescore  and  seventeen  men.  And  he  came 
unto  the  men  of  Succoth,  and  said.  Behold  Zebah  and  Zalmunna,  with  [as  to" 
whom  ye  did  upbraid  [mock]  me,  saying,  Are  the  hands  of  Zebah  and  Zalmunna 
now  [already]  in  thine  hand,  that  we    should   give   bread  unto  thy  men   that  are 

16  weary  [hungry]?     And  he  took  the  elders  of  the  city,  and  thorns  of  the  wilderness, 

17  and  briers,  and  with  them  he  taught  [gave  a.  lesson  to]  the  men  of  Succoth.     And  he 

18  beat  [tore]  down  the  tower  of  Penuel,  and  slew  the  men  of  the  city.  Then  said  he 
[And  he  said]  unto  Zebah  and  Zalmunna,  What  manner  of  men  were  they  whom 
ye  slew  at  Tabor  ?     And  they  answered,  As  thou   art,  so  were   they ;  each  one 

19  resembled  [looked  like]  the  children  [sons]  of  a  king.  And  he  said,  They  were 
my  brethren,  even  the  sons  of  my  mother  :  as  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  liveth,  if  ye  had 

20  saved  them  alive,  I  would  not  slay  you.  And  he  said  unto  Jether  his  first-born, 
Up,  and  slay  them.     But  the  youth   [boy]  drew  not  his  sword :  for  he  feared, 

21  because  [for]  he  was  yet  a  youth  [boy].  Then  Zebah  and  Zalmunna  said.  Rise 
thou,  and  fall  upon  [strike]  us  :  for  as  the  man  is,  so  is  his  strength.  And  Gideon 
arose,  and  slew  Zebah  and  Zalmunna,  and  took  away  the  ornaments  [moons]  that 
were  on  their  camels'  necks. 

TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

p  Ver.  6.  —  Dr.  Cassel :  "  Hast  thou  the  fist  of  Zebah  and  Zalmunna  already  in  thy  hand,"  etc.  Bertheau  and  Keil, 
In  their  commentaries,  have  the  same  rendering,  merely  changing  Luther's  plural,  Sind  die  Faiiste,  to  the  singular. 
F)3  is  properly  the  hollow  hand,  the  palm ;  accordingly  the  Dutch  Version  renders,  rather  awkwardly  to  be  sure,  ((  Ij 
dan  the  handpalm  van  Zebah  en  Tsalmuna  alreede  in  uwe  hand,"  etc.  The  word  rt  fist,"  even  if  it  did  not  somewhat 
titer  the  metaphor  involved,  lacks  dignity  in  modern  English,  although  it  avoids  the  tameness  of  using  tc  hand  "  twice. 
For  an  independent  version,  De  Wette*s  would  be  better :  f(  Hast  thou  then  Zebah  and  Zalmunna  already  in  thy  hand." 
etc.  —  Te.] 

p  Ver.  10.  —  CH'Sna  :   singular,  with  plural  suftlx.     Cf.  Qes.  Gram.  Sect.  93,  9.  —  Tr.] 

f3  Ver.  13.  —  ^"T'n  n^37?7^?.  The  above  rendering  takes  no  account  of  the  "7.  "  At  "  would  be  better 
than  K  from."  It  is  literally,  "  from  at "  the  ascent  of  the  sun.  It  indicates  the  point  to  which  Qideon  came,  and  at 
which  he  turned  back.  —  Tr.1 


EXE8ETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  4-9.  And  Gideon  came  to  the  Jordan. 
The  pride  of  Ephraim  was  not  the  only  incident 
by  which  Gideon  was  taught  that  the  liberation  of 
his  people  required  more  than  victory  over  its  ene- 
mies :  that  its  servitude  consisted  not  merely  in 
external  subjection,  but  much  more  in  the  internal 
bondage  of  sin  and  unbelief.  Gideon  also  experi- 
ences the  truth,  which  the  political  history  of  all 
ages  demonstrates,  that  the  friends  of  the  people 
and  its  true  interests,  do  not  always  find  their 
natural  supporters  in  the  people  itself.  Instead  of 
confederates,  they  find  obstructors  and  opponents. 
Was  not  Gideon's  a  national  achievement,  for  the 
freedom  and  happiness  of  all  ?  Is  it  not  for  all 
that  he  risks  his  life  ?  For  whom  does  he  wage 
war  even  to  extermination  with  Midian.  but  for  all 
Israel  ?  Was  it  anything  unreasonable,  that  he 
asked  Succoth.  a  considerable  city,  for  some  bread 
for  the  men  who,  notwithstanding  the  many  hard- 
ships endured,  had  not  ceased  to  follow  their  en- 
thusiastic leader  ?  —  The  Septuagint  justly  puts 
■xipjtvrcr,  hungry,  for  CS^V.     The  same  word 


(H?.^  is  used  by  Esau,  when  he  returns  from  the 
chase,  and  sees  the  dish  of  lentiles  (Gen.  xxv.  30). 
Had  the  men  been  wearied,  they  could  not  have 
prosecuted  the  pursuit.  But  nutritious  food  would 
strengthen   them.      For  that   they  longed.      The 

term  is  not  specific,  like  —  V"^,  but  signifies  need 
of  physical  nourishment.  It  includes  thirst  as  well 
as  hunger  (cf.  Job  xxii.  7).  —  But  what  did  Suc- 
coth ?  Instead  of  compassion  and  patriotic  sym- 
pathy, it  consulted  its  own  petty  interests.  Sue 
coth  believed  not;  nor,  consequently,  saw  God's 
hand  in  Gideon's  victories.  Materialism,  which 
rather  than  risk  a  loss,  will  serve  a  foreign  tyrant, 
is  here  depicted  to  the  life.  The  magistracy  of 
Succoth  consider,  not  the  duty  to  assist,  but  the 
danger  which  may  result  from  such  a  siding  with 
Gideon  as  would  be  implied  in  rendering  him  aid. 
For,  not  to  mention  that  a  quantity  of  bread  costs 
something  —  and  it  is  noticeable  that  while  Gideon 

modestly  intercedes  for  his  "  followers  "  (  y?"25) 
they  talk  of  his  band  as  a  host  (^TS^"  ),  —  then 
is  a  chance  that  Gideon  may  fail  in  his  expedition 


134 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


Zebah  and  Zalmimna  may  possibly  conquer  and 
take  vengeance.  So  do  slaves  speculate.  Not  so 
thought  the  German  cities  in  1813,  when,  driven 
by  the  hand  of  God,  Napoleon  fled  from  Russia; 
%  disposition  which,  in  spite  of  Davoust  and  Van- 
damme,  brought  victory  to  those  cities.  "  Hast 
thou,"  they  ask  mockingly,  "  the  fist  of  the  kings 

already  in  thy  hand  1  "  The  full  hand,  H?i  must 
be  seized,  in  order  to  apply  the  fetters  to  captives. 
This  is  the  second  time  that  Gideon  encounters 
such  folly  among  his  people.  But  he  instantly 
perceives  that  humility  and  gentleness  like  those 
shown  towards  Ephraim,  would  here  be  out  of 
place.  Ephraim  had  at  all  events  done  something, 
and  had  not  refused  assistance.  Here  were  cow- 
ardice and  treason  combined.  He  does  not,  how- 
ever, chastise  them  at  once.  Therein  also  he  shows 
a  soul  penetrated  by  spiritual  strength.  He  will 
not  manifest  personal  resentment ;  he  will  show 
them  that  they  have  offended  against  the  cause  of 
God.  He  is  sure  of  victory ;  but  before  he  pun- 
ishes them,  they  shall  see  that  finished,  the  accom- 
plishment of  which  they  now  doubt.  When  he 
shall  appear  before  Succoth  with  Zebah  and  Zal- 
munna  in  fetters,  they  will  no  doubt  be  glad  to 
give  him  bread  ;  but  then  he  will  give  them  that 
to  which  now  on  his  king-chase  through  the  desert 
they  refer  him  —  he  will  thresh  them  with  "  thorns 
of  the  desert  and  with  barkanim."  Owing  to  the 
brevity  of  the  narrative,  which  only  gives  the  lead- 
ing speeches,  while  it  omits  all  transitions,  it  is  not 
altogether  clear  why  Gideon's  threat  against  the 
inhabitants  of  Succoth  takes  the  precise  form  of 
"  thorns."     The  ingenious  Kimchi  thought  that  it 

was  a  play  on  the  name  of  the  city,  since  ^3^ 

(by  the  constant  Chaldee  substitution  of  O  for  tt\ 

n|D,  plur.  niSD)  means  a  thorn  (Job  xl.  31  ;  cf. 

T\ip,  plural  D"3tP).  He  even  thinks  that  the 
name  of  the  city  may  perhaps  have  been  derived 
from  this  word.  But,  though  such  a  word-play 
might  not  have  been  altogether  at  variance  with 
the  spirit  of  antiquity,  it  can  scarcely  be  supposed 
to  have  such  controlling  influence  in  our  passage. 

For  then  why  is  not  the  word  '"'StC'  used  by  Gid- 
eon ?  But  instead  of  it,  other  and  rather  remote 
terms  are  chosen.  The  choice  of  the  punishment 
denounced  seems  to  have  a  deeper  reason.  The 
magistracy  of  Succoth  refuses  bread :  is  not  that 
of  itself  a  mocking  reference  to  the  food  which  the 
desert  affords  ?  But  what  does  Gideon  find  there? 
That  which  can  nourish,  not  men,  but  at  best  only 
the  camel,  that  marvel  of  the  desert  —  acacia- 
thorns,  thistles,  tarfa-needles,  springing  up  amid 
sand  and  rock.  Shall  he  thresh  these  like  grain, 
in  order  to  bake  bread  ?  He  requites  their  mock- 
ery, by  promising  with  such  thorns  to  belabor  their 
flesh.     Hence,  the  most  probable  explanation  of 

Cpi^"1?  w''l  continue  to  be  that,  which,  after  the 
constant  exegetical  tradition  of  the  Jews,  makes  it 
thistles  or  thorns  (Raschi  explains  it  by  the  French 
ronces,  briers),  and  the  same  as  those  already  indi- 
cated by  "  thorns  of  the  desert."  The  idea  sug- 
gests itself  that  kotse  hamidbar  mav  only  precede 
barkanim  by  way  of  explanation  ;  in  which  case 

J~W1  would  have  the  sense  of  "  namely :  "  "  thorns 

i  Analogies  to  this  word,  such  as  pd\os,  thorn  -  :  Spdxot 
(cf.  p'i6ii'',s  and  ppa&ivos,  ptyos  and  frtgits),  cannot  here  be 
[briber  investigated,  in  Scandinavian  dialects,  rhamnus, 
thortibiish,  is  called  sttbark  or  geitbark. 


of  the  desert,  namely  barkanim."1  For  that  Barka 
(Barca)  designates  stony  syrtes,  may  be  considered 
as  made  out  (see  on  ch.  i.  4).  The  thorns  meant 
are  probably  those  of  the  acacia,  called  talh  by  the 
Arabs,  which  cover  the  ground  to  such  an  extent, 
that  many  Arabs  are  accustomed  to  carry  thorn- 
extractors  about  them  (cf.  Bitter,  xiv.  207,  336). 

That  the  threatened  chastisement  corresponds  to 
the  expressions  made  use  of  by  the  ungrateful  citi- 
zens in  reply  to  Gideon's  request,  is  evident  from 
the  fact  that,  though  he  receives  the  same  treat- 
ment from  the  inhabitants  of  Penuel,  he  does  not 
threaten  them  with  the  same  punishment.  These, 
who  deemed  themselves  secure  in  their  tower,  he 
promises  to  tear  down  that  bulwark  of  their  pride. 

DiblfQ  ^iltfa  :  not  exactly,  when  I  return  in 
peace  ;  but,  when  I  return  prosperously,  with  suc- 
cess and  victory. 

Vers.  10-12.  And  Zebah  and  Zahnunna  were 
in  Karkor.  We  are  yet  to  trace  the  course  of 
Gideon's  pursuit.  Succoth  lay  beyond  the  Jordan, 
for  he  came  to  it  after  crossing  the  river  (ver.  4  ; 
cf.  Josh.  xiii.  27).  It  was,  moreover,  south  of  the 
Jabbok  (Zerka),  for  the  scene  of  Jacob's  wrestling 
was  north  of  that  stream,  he  alone  having  re- 
mained behind,  while  his  people  had  crossed  over 
(Gen.  xxxii.  23,  24).  The  place  of  the  wrestling 
was  afterwards  occupied  by  Penuel.  When  morn- 
ing had  come,  Jacob  passed  over  the  stream  at 
Penuel  (Gen.  xxxii.  31),  joined  his  family,  met 
Esau,  and  afterwards  came  to  Succoth,  which  was 
therefore  south  of  the  Jabbok.  This  position  of 
Succoth  agrees  with  that  in  which  we  left  Gideon 
at  his  meeting  with  Ephraim.  That  tribe  had 
guarded  the  Wady  el  Faria  and  the  fords  in  its 
neighborhood.  It  was  in  the  vicinity  of  this  Wady 
that  they  met  with  Gideon,  prosecuting  the  pur- 
suit, and  brought  him  the  heads  of  the  captured 
princes.  Now,  if  he  passed  over  at  this  point,  he 
would  land  south  of  the  Jabbok,  and  reach  Succoth 
first.  He  then  crossed  the  Jabbok,  and  came  to 
Penuel.  The  hiding-place  of  the  terrified  enemy- 
was  no  secret  to  him.  There  is  in  Hauran  an 
almost  unassailable  place  of  refuge  for  the  robber 
tribes  —  the  volcanic  rock-desert  of  Safa  (both  in 
the  wider  and  narrower  sense),  concerning  which 
some  very  valuable  information  is  given  by  Wetz- 
stein.  It  embraces  a  fertile  district,  "a  Ruhbeh, 
Paradise,"  for  some  months  of  the  year,  which  is 
almost  as  inaccessible  as  Paradise.  Says  Wetz- 
stein  (Hauran,  p.  15,  etc.)  :  "  Here  is  the  strong- 
hold of  the  Gejat,  and  Staye,  and  all  the  tribes  of 
the  eastern  slope  of  the  Hauran  mountains."  The 
people  of  Syria  have  a  proverbial  expression  which 
says,  "  he  fled  into  the  Wa'r  of  the  Safa,"  ;'.  e., 
into  an  unassailable  refuge.  The  Ruhbeh  can 
only  be  reached  by  two  roads,  from  the  north  and 
thesouth.  The  northern  is  especially  dangerous  ; 
even  in  our  own  days  hostile  tribes  have  made 
inroads  at  Rigin  el  Mara.  The  Safa,  and  the  whole 
of  this  terrible,  rock-walled  asylum,  is  what  we  are 

here  to  understand  by  the  term  Ip"?^  Karkor 
For  this  word  signifies  ruins,  destruction :  cf.  Num 
xxiv.  17:  "he  destroys  —  "1i2T2') —  all  the  sons 
of  Sheth."  The  same  verb  is  used,  Is.  xxii.  5,  of 
the  destruction  of  walls ;  and  in  Talmudic  as  well 

as  modern  Hebrew   WJflpli]  means  destruction  a 

2  Eusebius  (Onomast.,  Perthey,  p.  252)  does  not  say  tha: 
this  Karkor  and  Carcaria  near  Petra  are  one  and  the  samj 
place.  Nor  can  they  Dm  the  same,  although  the  namet  nia> 
be  similarly  explained 


CHAPTER    VIII.    4-21. 


135 


Snch  being  the  situation  and  topography  of  the 
place,  the  significance  of  the  brief  statement  that 
the  kings  were  in  Karkor,  becomes  manifest.  It 
not  only  explains  the  sense  of  security  felt  by  the 
enemy,  but  also  and  especially  displays  the  bold- 
ness, endurance,  wisdom,  and  energy,  with  which 
Gideon  followed  them  into  their  hiding-place.  We 
can  still  trace  his  route ;  for  it  passed  to  the  east 
of  Nobah  and  Jogbehah.  Nobah  is  the  same  as 
Kenath  (Num.  xxxii.  42),  which  again  is  the  Ka- 
natha  of  Roman  times,  and  the  Kanvat  of  the 
present.  He  who  is  north  of  the  Jabbok,  and 
passes  east  of  Kanvat,  if  he  be  in  search  of  an 
enemy  retired  to  his  hiding-place,  must  be  bound 
for  the  Safa.  But  Jogbehah  also  can  be  identified. 
Since  Gideon's  way  is  said  to  have  gone  to  the 
east  of"  Nobah  and  Jogbehah,"1  the  latter  must 
have  lain  farther  north  than  the  other,  and  there  is 
thus  the  more  reason  for  regarding  it  as  the  same 
with  Johbah,  the  Shobah  of  Seetzen,  Shuhubali 
of  Buckingham  (cf.  Ritter,  xv.  881),  and  Shubbah 
of  Wetzstein. 

Gideon's  attack  was  so  unexpected  and  sudden, 
that  a  renewed  attempt  at  flight  fails  (ver.  12). 

The  host,  it  is  said,  T^nn  :  terror  seized  it,  so 
that  no  resistance  was  offered,  and  the  army  sur- 
rendered. The  celerity  of  this  victorious  career, 
and  its  results,  finds  many  parallels  in  the  history 
of  the  desert  tribes.  When  Mehemct  Ali,  in  1815, 
fought  against  Asyr  in  Arabia,  he  pursued  the 
defeated  enemy  with  such  haste,  that  all  his  stores 
of  subsistence  had  to  be  left  behind,  and  he  him- 
self was  at  last  reduced  to  a  diet  of  dates.  But  he 
was  rewarded  for  this  by  the  capture  of  the  chiefs 
of  his  adversaries,  and  many  others  went  over  to 
him  (cf.  Ritter,  xii.  932).  But  that  for  which  no 
parallels  can  be  adduced,  is  Gideon's  aim,  his 
cause  for  war,  and  the  fewness  of  his  enthusiastic 
warriors  compared  with  the  overwhelming  num- 
bers arrayed  against  him  to  the  last.  Even  if  the 
120,00(1,  lost  by  ilidian  in  the  course  of  their  defeat, 
from  the  Hill  of  Moreh  to  Karkor,  were  a  round 
number,  a  stream  of  blood  nevertheless  marked 
the  track  of  the  smitten  tyrants,  as  it  marked  that 
of  Napoleon's  retreat  from  Russia.  It  was  proba- 
bly from  prisoners  and  wounded  left  behind,  at 
Stations  of  Death,  that  Gideon  learned  the  secret 
way  into  the  rocky  asylum,  called  "  hell  "  by  Ara- 
bic" poets,  on  account  of  its  volcanic  formations, 
and  now  become  a  place  of  judgment  for  a  seven 
years'  oppression  (ch.  vi.  1  ;  compare  the  period 
of  1806-1813  in  German  history). 

Vers.  13-17.  And  Gideon,  the  son  of  Joash, 
returned  from  the  "war  from  the  Ascent  of  the 
Sun.  The  addition  Son  of  Joash,  is  here  put  to 
Gideon's  name  for  the  first  time  since  his  rising 
against  idolatry.  The  glory  of  having  finished  the 
conflict,  accrues  to  the  family  and  name  of  Joash, 
because  in  the  hour  of  danger  he  had  sided  with 
his  son.  For  that  the  conflict  is  ended,  was  already 
indicated  by  ver.  10,  which  said  that  "  all  that 
were  left"  of  the  "whole  host"  were  in  Karkor. 
The  victory  over  this  remnant  ended,  not  merely  a 

battle,  but  HOrOSH,  the  war.  The  hero  can 
now  turn  back,  but  not  yet  to  his  own  house.  He 
must  first  settle  accounts  with  Succoth  and  Penuel. 
He  comes  to  Succoth  first.  Had  he  returned  the 
way  hi.  went,  he  must  have  reached  Penuel   first. 

1  Greek  texts  have  a  corrupt  form  *Irye0aA.  The  Syrian 
f  ersion  of  Paul  of  Tela  does  not  have  the  name  at  all  (Rbr- 
lam,  p.  169). 

2  For  which  the  Jewish  expositors  decide,  because  they 
issigu  the  previcus  expedition  to  the  night-time. 


His  design  was  evidently  to  surprise  both  places, 
but  chiefly  Succoth,  so  that  when  he  came  to  pun- 
ish, the  scourge  might  fall  only  on  the  persona 
who  had  deserved  it.     Bearing  this  in  mind,  the 

connection  makes  it  clear  that  3~]nr7  n^l'S  -? 
is  not  to  be  taken  as  a  note  of  time,-  sunrise,  but 
of  locality.  It  is  designed  to  explain  how  Gideon 
comes  to  reach  Succoth  first,  and  from  a  direction 
from  which  the  inhabitants  did  not  expect  him. 
Gideon  everywhere  displays  that  great  quality  of  a 
general,  the  skill  to  baffle  the  calculations  of  his 
adversary.  What  sort  of  a  locality  "  Maaleh  Ha 
cheres  "  was,  the  following  hypothesis  may  perhaps 
indicate  with  some  degree  of  probability.    Succoth 

lay  in  the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  the  Ghor,  PP?? 

(Josh.  xiii.  27).  The  expression  i"1!?^^  can  only 
be  used  in  connection  with  mountains  (cf.  "Maa- 
leh Akrabbim,"  ch.  i.  36).  The  heights  from 
which  Gideon  descended  in  order  to  reach  Succoth, 
were  the  mountains  east  of  the  Jordan,  which 
unfortunately  are  yet  too  little  known.  About 
the  names,  also,  which  in  earlier  and  later  periods 
they  bore,  we  are  very  much  in  the  dark.  Now, 
in  the  territory  of  Reuben,  we  find  (Josh.  xiii.  19) 
a  "  Tsereth  Hashachar  on  the  Mountain  of  the  Val- 
ley." The  name  D~0  signifies  the  sun.  "  Sun- 
rise "  (!"HTD)  always  indicates  the  cast  side.  Ac- 
cordingly, in  the  passage  just  cited,  we  have  a 
Tsereth  Hashachar,  ;'.  e..  "  Spleudorof  the  Dawn," 
on  the  mountains  of  the  Ghor,  in  the  east.  It  may 
therefore  be  assumed  with  great  probability  that 
the  name  "  Ascent  of  the  Sun  "  also  was  borne  by 
the  heights  of  the  mountains  east  of  the  Jordan, 
whether  those  mountains  were  named  "  Sun  "  or 
"  Sunrise"  on  local,  or  what  is  more  probable  on 
religious  grounds. 

As  Gideon  appeared  quite  unexpectedly,  he 
succeeded  in  laying  hold,  unnoticed,  of  a  boy,  whe 
wrote  down  for  him  the  names  of  those  whu  com- 
posed the  magistracy  of  the  city.  It  is  not  with- 
out interest  to  observe  that  the  boy  HP^  could 
write,  that  he  knew  the  names  of  the  authorities, 
and  that  these  numbered  seven  and  seventy,  of 

whom  seven  or  five  may  be  regarded  as  C^K', 
princes,  and  seventy  or  seventy-two  as  elders.  If 
the  government  of  the  city  was  in  the  hands  of 
certain  families,  the  boy  would  not  find  it  difficult 
to  give  their  names.  The  astonishment  and  terror 
of  the  inhabitants  were  doubtless  great.  The  more 
haughty  they  had  formerly  been,  the  more  terrified 
were  they  now.  It  is  to  be  carefully  noted  that 
Gideon's  purpose  is  to  punish  only  the  rulers  of 
Succoth,  and  that  after  he  has  done  it,  the  remark 
is  made:  HiSD  "tt^N  HN  S"tV  -  "he 
taught  the  men  of  Succoth  a  lesson."  This  alone 
shows  that  the  reading  E?7t-'  "  ne  threshed," 
already  proposed  by  Serarius,  and  again  by  Ber- 
theau,  is  not  to  be  approved.  For  the  fact  that 
"  he  took  the  elders  of  the  city  and  the  thorns," 
makes  it  clear  that  he  cannot  have  chastised 
the  people  of  Succoth.  But  he  "  made  them  —  the 
whole  people,  —  to  know  : "  gave  them  a  lesson 
which  showed  how  badly  their  rulers  had  acted, 
and  what  penalties  such  distrust  and  selfishness 

8  That  37"T^1  need  not  necessarily  be  written  I'TVl 
(Bertheau),  and  is  found  elsewhere,  has  already  been  justly 
remarked  by  Keil,  who  refers  to  Num.  xvi  6,  and  Job 
xxxii.  7. 


136 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


entail  (which  has  been  well  apprehended  by  the 
Jewish  expositors).  At  Penuel,  however,  which, 
having  heard  of  the  visitation  of  Succoth,  had  the 
folly  to  defend  itself,  the  traitors  lost  their  lives. 
It  is  truly  admirable,  how  finely  the  narrative,  with 
all  its  plainness,  brings  out  the  specially  decisive 
points  of  view.  Gideon  went  first  to  Succoth,  be- 
cause he  did  not  wish  to  punish  all  the  inhabitants, 
and  it  became  necessary  therefore  to  surprise  the 
city,  lest  the  guilty  should  escape,  and  to  "  catch  a 
boy,"  who  unreservedly  gives  him  their  names. 
His  purpose  as  to  Penuel  requires  no  surprise  — 
the  tower  cannot  run  away;  and  it  is  the  folly  of 
the  inhabitants,  that  in  defending  it,  they  lose  their 
lives  as  well  as  their  tower. 

Vers.  18-21.  And  he  said  to  Zebah  and  Zal- 
munna.  This  took  place  on  his  arrival  at  home, 
i.  e.  in  Israel,  for  his  son  Jether  was  present,  who, 
being  but  a  boy,  cannot  have  shared  in  the  heroic 
expedition.  The  place  cannot,  however,  be  defi- 
nitely determined ;  perhaps  it  was  his  old  battle- 
field, the  plain  of  Jezreel,  where  the  people  came 
flocking  together,  in  order  to  behold  the  terrible 
kings  in  fetters. 

The  closing  scene  of  Gideon's  dealings  with 
these  robber-kings,  like  every  other  in  his  history, 
is  worthy  of  a  hero  who  has  been  raised  up  to  bat- 
tle with  the  sword  and  mete  out  punishment.  To 
spare  the  lives  of  enemies,  especially  of  enemies  so 
barbarous  and  cruel  as  these,  was  not  the  custom 
of  antiquity,  least  of  all  in  the  east.  Pyrrhus  (in 
Seneca)  says : l  Lex  nulla  capto  parcit  aut  paenam 
impedit;  and  even  Josephus  (Ant.  ix.  4,  3)  makes 
Elisha  say  —  what,  however,  he  never  did  say  — 
that  it  is  right  to  kill  captives  taken  in  a  just  war. 
But  Gideon,  who  respects  the  royalty  of  his  cap- 
tives, enemies  though  they  be,  would  gladly  spare 
them,  and  believes  himself  obliged  at  least  to  show 
them  why  he  cannot  do  it.  Through  this  circum- 
stance, we  hear  of  an  occurrence  otherwise  un- 
known —  a  fact  which  may  suggest  and  cause  us 
to  regret  how  much  other  information  has  perhaps 
failed  to  reach  us.  The  kings,  it  seems,  had  caught 
and  slain  on  Mount  Tabor  the  brothers  of  Gideon, 
sons  of  the  same  mother 2  as  well  as  father  with 
himself.  It  is  probable  that  this  took  place  after 
some  earlier  battle,  engaged  in  by  Manasseh  —  but 
without  God's  help  —  against  the  invaders.  They 
were  put  to  death,  though  only  engaged  in  de- 
fending their  native  land,  and  though  —  as  Zebah 
and  Zalmunna  flatteringly  say  —  they  looked  like 
Gideon,  like  men  of  royal  blood.  In  their  persons, 
therefore,  "  kingly  bearing,"  stately  presence  and 
chivalrous  valor,  had  not  been  respected ;  and  shall 
Gideon  spare  those  who  were  robbers  and  murder- 
ers of  seven  years'  standing  ?  Impossible  !  Gid- 
eon's sword  has  been  whetted  for  the  very  purpose 
of  administering  righteous  judgment.  WhenTur- 
nus  entreated  /Eneas  for  his  life,  the  latter,  remem- 
bering that  the  former  had  slain  Pallas,  the  son  of 
Evander,  and  "funis  wxensus  et  ira  terribilis,"  ex- 
claimed, '"  PaUas  te  immolat,"  etc.,  and  thrust  the 
spear  into  his  heart  (sEneid,  xii.  949).  And  yet 
Turnus  was  a  native  of  the  country,  and  fought 
against   aliens,  and   Pallas  was  neither   son    nor 

1  Cf.  Grotius.  Dt  Jure  Pads  et  Belli,  lib.  iii.  4,  10. 

2  [Bush  :  "  In  countries  where  polygamy  is  tolerated,  the 
ties  of  brotherhood  are,  as  might  be  expected,  much  more 
rlose  and  tender  between  those  who  are  born  of  the  same 
Qiother,  than  those  who  are  connected  only  as  the  children 
of  the  same  father.  This  explains  why  (  son  of  my  mother  ' 
was  among  the  Ilebrews,  as  now  among  the  Arabs  and 
others,  a  far  more  endearing  expression  than  that  of  '  my 
brother."   'r    ttie  general  sense  "'     The  same  remarks  hold 


brother  of  ^Eneas.  The  intimation  that  the  fam 
ily  of  Joash  had  previously  already  bled  for  Israel, 
throws  a  new  light  on  the  question  why  of  all  uieii 
Gideon  was  selected  to  be  the  conqueror.  How- 
ever, notwithstanding  their  ill  deserts,  he  does  not 
treat  his  captives  cruelly.  He  neither  makes  them 
objects  of  taunt  or  insult,  nor  uses  them  for  pur- 
poses of  ostentation  and  self-glorification.  He  does 
not  load  them  with  ignominy,  as  Sapor  is  said  to 
have  done  to  the  Roman  Emperor  Valerian,  and, 
according  to  the  legend  in  Eutychius,  Galerius  to 
a  Sapor,  and  Tamerlane  to  Bajazet.3  The  honor 
of  the  captives  was  sufficiently  consulted,  even 
when  Gideon  wished  to  make  his  eldest  son  the 
executor  of  his  sentence.  But  he,  a  boy,  and  ap- 
parently of  timid  bearing,  shrinks  from  drawing 
his  sword  against  the  mighty  foemen,  still  distin- 
guished by  royal  state  and  show.  And  truly,  they 
must  have  been  terrible  warriors ;  they  ask  not  for 
life,  as  Turnus  and  Homeric  warriors  do,  but  de 
sire  to  be  slain  by  the  hand  of  an  equal,  and  not  to 
be  hacked  and  hewn  by  the  sword  of  a  boy ;  for, 
say  they,  "as  the  man,  so  is  his  strength."  They 
have  no  other  request  to  make  than  that  Gideon 
will  kill  them  himself;  and  he  complies  with  it  — 
they  fall  by  his  sword.  The  "moons  "  which  have 
hitherto  ornamented  their  camels'  necks,  he  now 
takes  off;  an  evidence  that  even  in  captivity  they 
have  experienced  kingly  treatment.  That  lie  does 
not  take  them  oft'  until  after  the  kings  are  dead, 
indicates  that  they  are  the  special  insignia  of  roy- 
alty, and  crescent-shaped.  Thus,  according  to 
Philostratus  (lib.  ii.  cap.  1),  Apollonius  of  Tvana 
received  the  convoy  of  a  camel  from  the  Persian 
king,  which  headed  the  train,  and  by  a  golden 
ornament  on  its  face  indicated  its  royal  ownership. 
In  the  poem  of  Statius  (cf.  Bochart,  Hierozoicon,  i. 
17)  the  horse  of  Parthenopanis,  the  fabled  assail- 
ant of  Thebes,  wears  crescent-shaped  ornaments 
(lunata  monilia).  Mention  is  made  of  an  Arabic 
expression,  which  speaks  of  "  moon-shaped  camel 
ornaments  "  (Ritter,  xii.  486).  The  ornament,  in 
its  peculiar  shape,  was  evidently  an  escutcheon  of 
the  ancient  Ishmaelites,  who  were  worshippers  of 
the  moon  (Herod,  iii.  8),  as  Scripture  also  speaks 
of  a  son  of  Joktan,  the  progenitor  of  many  Arab 
tribes,  whose  name  was  Jerah,  moon  (Gen.  x.  26). 
The  crescent  of  the  Arabizing  Ottomans  of  mod- 
ern times  may  be  referred  to  it  as  to  its  original. 
For  the  lurnuce  also,  which  adorned  the  shoes  of 
ancient  Roman  senators  and  nobles,  and  whose 
significance  was  obscure  even  to  antiquity  (l'lnt. 
Quest.  Horn.,  73),  had  only  the  shape  of  the  half- 
moon. 

HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

[Henry  :  "Faint  and  yet  pursuing;"  much 
fatigued  with  what  they  had  done,  yet  eager  to  do 
more.  Our  spiritual  warfare  must  thus  be  prose- 
cuted  with  what  strength  we  have,  though  but  lit 
tie;  it  is  many  a  time  the  true  Christian's  case,  faint- 
ing, yet  pursuing.  —  Bi\  Hall:  It  is  hard  if  those 
who  tight  the  wars  of  God  may  not  have  necessary 
relief;  that  whilst   the  enemy  dies  by  them,  they 

also  of  the  tribes  of  Western  Africa.  Speaking  of  polygamy 
and  family  life  amoug  them,  the  Rev.  J.  G.  Auei  observe* 
(Spirit  of  Missims  for  1867,  p.  729):  rr  Children  cleave  tc 
their  mother  more  than  to  their  fattier,  and  a  full  brochel 
or  sister  is  called  r  my  mother's  child/  "  —  Tr.J 

8  [On  the  first  of  these  stories,  see  Gibbon's  Decline^  ete. 
Milman's  ed.,  Boston,  i  319  ;  on  the  second,  vol.  vi.  271 
note  68  ;  on  the  third,  vi.  267-71,  with  Milman's  nofe  m  p 
271.  —  Tr.J 


CHAPTER    VIII.    22-32.  137 


ihould  die  by  famine.  If  they  had  labored  for  God 
at  home  in  peace,  they  had  been  worthy  of  main- 
tenance ;  how  much  more  now  that  danger  is 
added  to  their  toil?  —  The  same:  Those  that 
tight  tor  our  souls  against  spiritual  powers,  may 
challenge  bread  from  us ;  and  it  is  shameless  un- 
thankfulness  to  deny  it. 

The  same  (on  the  punishment  of  Succoth) :  I 


now  hath  wrestled  against  God  and  takes  a  fall 
they  see  God  avenged,  which  would  not  believe  Hiir 
delivering. —  Wordsworth:  They  who  now  de- 
spise the  mercy  of  Christ  as  the  Lamb,  will  here- 
after feel  the  wrath  of  Christ  as  the  Lion  (Rev.  v. 
5).  —  Bush  :  The  whole  of  this  remarkable  trans- 
action tends  to  inspire  us  with  confidence  in  God, 
and  to  encourage  our  exertions  in  his  cause ;  but 


know  not  whether  more  to  commend  Gideon's  wis-  j  there  are  two  lessons  especially  which  we  shall  dc 
dom  and  moderation  in  the  proceedings,  than  hi>  well  to  learn  from  it :  1.  To  prosecute  our  spiritual 
resolution  and  justice  in  the  execution  of  this  busi- .  warfare  under  all  discouragements  ourselves  ;  and 
ness.  I  do  not  see  him  ran  furiously  into  the  city,  |  2.  To  be  careful  to  put  no  discouragements  in  the 
and  kill  the  next;  his  sword  has  not  been  so  way  of  others.  God  is  indignant  with  those  who 
drunken  with  blood,  that  it  should  know  no  dif- 1  would  weaken  the  hands  of  his  people, 
ference ;  but  he  writes  down  the  names  of  the  Bp.  Hall  :  The  slaughter  of  Gideon's  brethren 
princes,  and  singles  them  forth  for  revenge.  —  The  i  was  not  the  greatest  sin  of  the  Midianitish  kings ; 


same:  It  is  like,  the  citizens  of  Succoth  would  have 
been  glad  to  succor  Gideon,  if  their  rulers  had  not 
forbidden.  They  must  therefore  escape,  while  their 
princes  perish.  —  The  same  (on  Renuel) :  The 
place  where  Jacob  wrestled  with  God  and  prevailed, 


[yet]  this  alone  shall  kill  them,  when  the  rest  [of 
their  sins]  expected  an  unjust  remission.  How 
many  lewd  men  hath  God  paid  with  some  one  sin 
for  all  the  rest !  —  Scott  :  Sins  long  forgotten 
must  be  accounted  for  to  God.  —  Tr.] 


Gideon  refuses  to  be  king.      Prepares  an  ephod,  which  is  followed  by  evil  const' 
quences.      Gideon's  death  and  burial. 

Chapter  VIII.     22-32. 

22       Then  [And]  the  men  of  Israel  said  unto  Gideon,  Rule  thou  over  us,  both  thou,  and 
thy  son,  and  thy  son's  son  also  :  for  thou  hast  delivered  us  from  the  hand  of  Mid- 
23  ian.     And  Gideon  said  unto  them,  I  will  not   rule  over  you,  neither  shall  my  son 

24  rule  over  you  :  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  shall  rule  over  you.  And  Gideon  said  unto 
them,  I  would  desire  a  request  of  you,  that  you  would  give  me  every  man  the  ear- 
rings [the  ring]  '  of  his  prey.     (For  they  had  golden  ear-rings  [rings],  because 

25  [for]  they  were  Ishmaelites.)  And  they  answered,  We  will  willingly  give  therh. 
And  they  spread  a  garment,2  and  did  cast  therein  every  man  the  ear-rings   [ring] 

26  of  his  prey.  And  the  weight  of  the  golden  ear-rings  [rings]  that  he  requested, 
was  a  thousand  and  seven  hundred  shekels  of  gold ;  beside  [apart  from  the]  orna- 
ments [moons],  and  [the]  collars  [ear-drops],  and  [the]  purple  raiment  [garments] 
that  was  \_were~\  on  the  kings  of  Midian,  and  beside  [apart  from]   the  chains  [col- 

27  lars]  that  were  about  their  camels'  necks.  And  Gideon  made  an  ephod  thereof, 
and  put  it  in  his  city,  even  in  Ophrah  :  and  all  Israel  went  thither  [omit :  thither] 
a  whoring  after  it  [there]  :  which  thing  [and  it  i.  e.  the  ephod]  became  a  snare  unto 

28  Gideon,  and  to  his  house.  Thus  was  Midian  subdued  [But  Midian  was  humbled] 
before  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel,  so  that  they  lifted  up  their  heads  no  more. 

29  And  the  country  was  in  quietness  3  forty  years  in  the  days  of  Gideon.    And  Jerub- 

30  baal  the  son  of  Joash  went  and  dwelt  in  his  own  house.     And  Gideon  had  three 

31  score  and  ten  sons  of  his  body  begotten  :  for  he  had  many  wives.  And  his  concu 
bine  that  was  in  Shechem,  she  also  bare  him  a  son,  whose  name  he  [they]  4  called 

32  Abimelech.  And  Gideon  the  son  of  Joash  died  in  a  good  old  age,  and  was  buried 
in  the  sepulchre  of  Joash  his  father,  in  Ophrah  of  the  Abi-eerites. 

TEXTUAL  AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  24.  —  CT3,  ring ;  whether  ear-ring  or  nose-ring,  the  word  itself  does  not  declare.  Cassel  and  De  Wette  both 
render  it  by  the  singular  (De  Wette,  Okrring).  It  is  used  as  a  collective,  and  simply  indicates  the  claas  of  ornaments 
Jesired,  without  any  reference  to  the  number  which  each  man  was  supposed  to  have,  or  was  expected  to  give.  This 
jidefinite  singular  is  best  rendered  in  English  by  the  plural,  as  in  E.  V.  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  25.  —  n  vttt£?n  :  Dr.  Cassel,  ein  Gewand,  ct  a  garment.''  The  definite  article  simply  indicates  the  gar- 
sent  used  on  the  occasion.     The  term    71  ^dP,     though  also  used  in  the  general  sense  of  garment  and  raiment,  i 


138 


THE   BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


ipecially  applied  to  the  outer  garment,  the  mantle  or  cloak,  cf.  Bib.  Diet.,  s.  v.  "  Dress.'1  Being  a  four-cornered  piet* 
of  cloth,  it  was  quite  suitable  for  the  present  purpose.  — Tb.] 

[8  Ver.  28.  —  V^Si"!  tiptTi^l,  "and  the  land  rested."  The  JE.  V.  departs  herefrom  its  own  previous  render 
ings,  see  ch.  iii.  11,  30  ;  ?  31,  where  the  Hebrew  has  the  same  words.  —  Tr.] 

[4  Ver.  31.  —  "i^lTTlS  Dti.,!*T  Dr  Oassel  :  man.  nannte  seinen  Namen.  Bertheau  also  tabes  CtE^I  as  th« 
indeterminate  3d  pers!  ^see  ties.  (Jr.  137,  3),  and  says  :  "  the  name  sounds  like  a  nickname,  given  him  because  his  lord 
•hip  was  of  such  brief  duration,  and  he  so  very  far  from  being  Father  of  a  King."  The  difficulty  is  that  the  text  give! 
no  hint  of  a  change  of  subject.     But  cf.  the  commentary  below,  and  Keil's  view  in  note  on  p.  140.  —  Ta-1 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

An  extraordinary  victory  had  been  gained  —  a 
triumph  without  a  parallel.  A  glory  surrounds 
Gideon  in  the  eyes  of  Israel,  such  as  had  distin- 
guished no  one  else  within  the  memory  of  men. 
Who  can  stand  beside  him  1  How  has  the  arro- 
gance and  vain-glory  of  Ephraim  been  put  to 
shame !  Having  caught  a  couple  of  princes, 
already  fleeing  for  their  lives,  they  ceased  from  the 
couflict,  though  still  far  from  finished.  Gideon, 
whose  courage  began,  and  whose  untiring  en- 
ergy prosecuted  the  war,  has  also  finished  it.     He 

has  captured  and  destroyed,  not  princes  P"?.^1) 
merely,  but  —  as  the  narrative  emphatically  inti- 
mates—  the  kings  CO?S)  themselves.  And  what 
kings !  The  chiefs  of  all  Midian.  Kings,  there- 
fore, whose  defeat  and  capture  was  of  the  greatest 
consequence,  as  the  narrative  sufficiently  indicates 
by  the  constant  repetition  of  their  names.  Their 
names,  also,  like  those  of  the  "  princes,"  are  pe- 
culiar ;  those  were  borrowed  from  animals,  these 
from  •'  sacrifice"  and  "  carved  work."  The  latter 
therefore  indicate  perhaps  the  conjunction  of 
priestly  with  royal  authority.  Nor  did  Gideon 
smite  the  hostile  armies  in  his  own  country  merely, 
but  he  ventured  far  into  a  strange  land.  To  pur- 
sue a  great  army  into  the  rock  desert,  and  as  it 
were  drag  the  enemy  out  of  his  hiding-place,  was 
an  exploit  of  the  most  astounding  character.  Who 
but  Gideon  would  have  dared  to  enter  the  terrible 
Harra,  there  to  seize  his  royal  prey  ?  Apart  from 
this,  how  imposing  his  assurance,  his  wisdom,  his 
moderation  and  strength!  If  men  admired  the 
discreetness  of  his  answer  to  Ephraim,  they  were 
startled  by  the  punishment  of  Succoth  and  Penuel, 
md  the  terrible  recompense  meted  out  to  the 
dngs.  Success  carries  the  day  with  the  people : 
tow  surprising,  grand,  and  dazzling  was  its  form 
an  this  occasion  !  The  people  feel  that  now  they 
have  a  man  among  them,  who  towers,  not  physi- 
cally, but  in  soul  and  spirit,  far  above  them  all. 
No  wonder  that  Israel,  gathered  from  all  quarters 
to  see  the  hero  and  his  captures,  urgently  presses 
him,  and  says :  — 

Ycr.  22.  Rule  over  us,  thou,  thy  son,  and 
thy  son's  son.  This  is  the  language  of  gratitude 
and  admiration.  Excited,  and,  like  all  multitudes, 
easilv  carried  away  by  momentary  impulses  of  joy 
and  approval,  they  offer  him  the  supreme  authority, 
and  even  propose  "to  make  it  hereditary.  It  is  only 
done,  however,  in  a  storm  of  excitement.     Nor  do 

thev  propose  that  he  shall  be  their  "n!?P,  but  their 
^tro  —  not  their  King,  but  their  Imperator.  What 
thev  desire  is  to  be  not  only  for  his  honor,  but  also 
for  "their  welfare.  His  family  is  to  continue  forever 
the  champion  of  Israel.  But  in  this  vehement 
urgency  of  the  moment,  the  people  show  how  little 
they  comprehend,  notwithstanding  this  and  many 
Mher  great  events  of  their  history,  to  whom  they 
»r>    really  indebted   for  victory.     They  show  that 


they  regard  the  strength  by  which  Gideon  has  con- 
quered to  be  physical,  rather  than  moral.  Thou 
shalt  rule,  for  thou  hast  delivered  us  from  Midian. 
They  fail  to  perceive  the  contradiction  to  which 
they  give  utterance  when  they  talk  of  an  hereditary 
"Judge,"  or  as  they  word  it,  "ruler."  It  belongs 
to  the  essence  of  a  Judge,  that  he  oe  raised  up  by 
the  Spirit,  and  filled  with  the  strength  of  God.  He 
is  God's  military  ambassador  to  a  people  that  has 
no  king.  Not  the  people,  but  God,  had  made 
Gideon  what  he  was  —  their  military  leader  and 
commander.  His  children  will  not  be  able  to  lead 
the  nation,  unless  they  also  are  called  by  God. 
The  kingship  is  hereditary,  because  it  rests  on  the 
broad  basis  of  established  order,  and  not  merely  on 
the  endowments  of  extraordinary  persons.  The 
divinely  inspired  imperator  can  at  most  transmit 
only  his  treasures.  It  was  not  without  a  purpose 
that  the  narrative  told  of  the  timid  boy,  Jether, 
Gideon's  first-born.  Will  he  —  if  God  do  not  call 
him  —  be  able  to  smite  the  Midianites  i  and  if  he 
be  not  able,  will  the  men  of  Israel  obey  him  !  None 
the  less  great,  however,  was  the  temptation  for 
Gideon.  He  on  whom  but  recently  Ephraim 
looked  superciliously  down,  has  now  the  offer  of 
dominion  over  Israel  laid  at  his  feet.  It  requires 
more  strength  to  resist  the  allurements  of  proffered 
power,  than  to  defeat  an  enemy.  But  Gideon  is  a 
great  man,  greater  than  Washington,  to  whom 
absolute  dominion  was  not  offered,  and  who  ac- 
cepted the  Presidency  because  he  would  obey  "  the 
voice  of  the  people,"  saying  as  he  did  so,  that  "  no 
people  could  be  more  bound  to  acknowledge  and 
adore  the  invisible  hand  which  conducts  the  affairs 
of  men,  than  the  people  of  the  United  States  "  (cf. 
Marshall's  Lift  of  \\  ashimjton,  ii.  146). 

Ver.  23.  And  Gideon  said  unto  them,  I  will 
not  rule  over  you,  neither  shall  my  son  rule 
over  you :  Jehovah  shall  rule  over  you.  God 
—  not  "Elohim,"  but  "Jehovah,"  the  God  of 
Israel  —  is  your  only  Imperator.  With  this  he 
repels  the  idea  that  he  was  the  sole  and  real  con- 
queror, as  also  the  supposition  that  any  others  than 
those  whom  God  calls  can  be  of  service.  He 
declares,  moreover,  that  God  must  be  obeyed, 
because  He  is  the  Ruler ;  and  that  as  in  this  war 
against  Midian  victory  was  gained  only  because 
bis  ( Gideon's)  orders  were  followed,  so  victory  will 
always  be  contingent  on  obedience  to  God. 

With  these  words  Gideon  worthily  crowns  his 
heroic  deeds ;  and  there  he  should  have  stopped. 
But  the  moment  that  he  connects  the  cause  of  God 
with  a  measure  of  his  own,  albeit  with  the  best 
intentions,  he  falls  into  error,  and  without  design- 
ing it  leads  the  people  astray. 

Vers.  24-26.  Give  me,  "every  man,  the  ring 
of  his  booty.  Since  the  rings  were  taken  from 
men.  they  must  be  understood  to  be  ear-rings,  th< 
use  of  which,  especially  among  the  ancients,  was 
to  a  great  extent  common  to  both  men  and  women. 
In  Ceylon  and  among  the  Burmese,  the  perfora- 
tion of  the  ears  is  to  this  day,  for  both  sexes,  a  relig- 
ious ceremony ;  just  as  the  habit  of  wea.-ing  rings 


CHAPTER   VIII.   22-32. 


139 


did  not  have  its  origin  solely  in  desire  for  finery. 
The  ohservations  of  modem  travellers  among  the 
Arabs,  are  confined  to  female  ornaments,  but 
"  sons "  also  wore  such  rings  as  are  here  men- 
tioned, even  among  the  Israelites  (Ex.  xxxii.  2). 
Plautus  (Pamulus,  v.  2,  32)  says  jeeringly  of  the 
Carthaginians  :  "Digitos  in  manibus  non  habent,  quia 
inceduntcum  annularis  auribus"  (cf.  Serarius).  The 
explanation,  "  they  had  golden  rings,  for  they  were 
Ishmaelites,"  1  is  to  be  referred,  not  to  the  rings, 
but  to  the  material  of  which  they  were  made.  It 
calls  attention  to  the  love  of  finery  and  splendor 
which  then  as  now  characterized  the  Arab  tribes,3 
and  at  the  same  time  accounts  for  the  wealth  of 
gold  implied  in  the  possession  of  so  many  rings  of 
that  metal  by  the  Midianitish  army.  Gold  is  still 
extensively  used  by  the  Arabs  for  the  same  pur- 
poses (cf.  Ritter,  xiv.  415,  etc.;  xv.  828,  etc.). 

The  army  must  have  been  pervaded  by  thorough, 
even  though  temporary,  enthusiasm  for  their  heroic 
leader,  since  they  willingly  gave  up  the  most  val- 
uable part  of  the  booty,  without  knowing  but  that 
he  wanted  it  for  personal  use.  Accordingly,  an 
abundance  of  gold  rings  were  brought  together. 
Now,  tor  the  first  time,  was  Israel  astounded  at  the 
magnitude  of  the  spoil ;  now  was  it  seen  that  the 
man  who  formerly  ranked  his  harvest  second  to 
the  gleaning  of  Ephraim,  had  obtained  glory  and 
wealth  beyond  comparison.  For  not  only  were 
1,700  shekels  of  gold  handed  over  Co  him  at  this 
time,  but  to  him  also  belonged  (for  ver.  26  speaks 
only  of  his  possessions)  the  moons  (ver.  21),  the 

niE'tSj),  and  the  purple  garments  of  the  kings, 

and  the  decorations  of  their  camels.  The  iTlS^lM 
are  ear-pendants,  made  of  pearls  and  precious 
stones,3  peculiar  to  their  kings,  in  distinction  from 
the  simple  rings  worn  by  all  other  Midianites. 
The  name  signifies  a  "  drop,"  which  the  pearl 
resembled.  The  Greek  (rraKdy/uov,  with  which 
Gesenius  compares  it,  I  have  met  with  only  in 
Plautus  (Menechmei,  iii.  3)  as  stalaamia.  The 
monument  of  Cyrus  was  adorned  with  ear-pend- 
ants of  precious  stones  (Arrian,  vi.  29).  Proco- 
pius  represents  the  Persian  king  Pherozes  with  a 
costly  pearl  hanging  from  his  right  ear  (Brisson, 
De  Regno  Pers.,  p.  83).  Among  the  Indians, 
persons  of  distinction  wore  precious  stones  in  their 
ears  (Curtius,  viii.  9,  21).  In  the  Ramayana  it  is 
stated,  that  in  Ayodhya  no  one  was  without  ear- 
pendants  (akundali)  and  other  ornaments  (Bohlen, 
Alles  Indien,  ii.  170).  —  Great  wealth  stood  now  at 
Gideon's  command  ;  but  he  had  no  thought  of  ap- 
propriating the  gifts  of  the  men  of  Israel  to  him- 
self. All  that  he  retained  was  the  booty  which 
had  fallen  to  him  from  the  Midianitish  kings. 
Hannibal  also,  caused  the  rings  of  the  Roman 
knights  who  fell  at  Cannae  to  be  collected  by  the 

1  [Bertheau  :  "  Ishmaelites  is  the  general  name  of  a 
number  of  tribes,  among  whom  the  Midianites,  though 
according  to  Gen.  xxv.  2.  not  descended  from  Ishmael,  but 
from  Keturah,  were  also  reckoned,  cf  Gen.  xxxvii.  25,  28  ; 
xxxix.  1."  —  See  also  above,  on  ch.  vi.  1.  —  Tr] 

'2  [Wellsted  ("Reissn  in  Arabien,''  i.  224.  quoted  by  Keil) : 
—  "The  women  in  Oman  squander  considerable  sums  in  the 
purchase  of  silver  ornaments,  and  their  children  are  literally 
laden  with  them.  I  have  sometimes  counted  fifteen  ear- 
rings on  each  side,  and  head,  breast,  arms,  and  ankles,  were 
idorued  with  equal  profusion."  —  Tr.] 

8  In  Silius  Italicus  also  (Punica,  xii.  231),  we  find,  (f  In 
litre  lapis,  rubris  advectus  ob  oris." 

*  [Keil  .  t;  It  is  not  necessary  so  to  understand  this,  as 
.'/  the  1.700  shekels  (fifty  lbs.)  of  gold  were  worked  up  into 
he  ephod,  but  only  that   the   expense   of  making   it  was 


peck  (Liv.  xxiii.  12),  —  but  Gideon  has  no  Punic 
ends  in  view. 

Vers.  27,  28.  And  Gideon  made  an  ephod 
thereof.4  The  high-priestly  significance  of  the 
ephod  is  clearly  explained  in  Ex.  xxviii.  It  is  the 
special  sacred  garment,  by  which  Aaron  and  his 
sons  are  distinguished  as  priests.  With  the  ephod, 
the  breastplate  is  connected,  fastened  to  it  by 
strings,  and  not  to  be  displaced  (Ex.  xxviii.  28). 
This  garment,  with  the  breastplate,  the  high  priest 
wears  in  the  sanctuary.  With  it  therefore  are 
connected  the  Urim  and  Thummim,  through 
which  divine  instructions  are  imparted,  and  to 
which,  after  the  death  of  Moses  and  Joshua,  Israel 
applies  for  directions.  It  is  this  high-priestly  char 
acter  of  the  ephod,  and  the  gift  of  prophetic  com- 
munication through  the  Urim  and  Thummim  of 
its  breastplate  (cf.  1  Sam.  xxx.  7j,  that  explains 
the  consecration  of  such  a  garment  by  Gideon.  Its 
procurement  is  closely  connected  with  the  words  : 
"  Jehovah  shall  rule  over  you."  The  people  has 
been  saved  by  God's  revelation  of  Himself  to  Gid 
eon.  To  his  service,  therefore,  the  choicest  of  the 
spoil  must  be  devoted.  Nut  on  man,  but  on  Him, 
is  hope  to  be  built.  He  will  say  what  the  people 
are  to  do.  Through  the  priestly  ephod,  the  heav- 
enly King  will  speak,  and  rule  his  obedient  people. 
The  consecration  of  the  ephod,  therefore,  as  that 
with  which  the  Urim  and  Thummitn  are  connected, 
expresses  the  truth  that  God  governs  ;  and  is  Gid- 
eon's declaration  that  He,  and  not  any  human 
Imperator,  is  to  be  honored. 

Thus  far,  Gideon's  action  was  blameless,  and 
worthy  of  his  faith.  But  he  "deposited6  the 
ephod  in  his  city,  in  Ophrah."  Now,  Ophrah  was 
not  the  seat  of  the  common  sanctuary,  the  taber- 
nacle, nor  of  the  national  priesthood.  And  thougn 
the  priestly  family  of  that  day  may  have  been  in  a 
decline,  though  the  tribe  of  Ephraim,  among  whom 
it  had  at  that  time  its  principal  seat,  gave  unequiv- 
ocal evidence  of  unbelieving  pride,  on  which  ac 
count  alone  Gideon  might  hesitate  to  commit  the 
oracle  to  their  keeping ;  yet,  all  these  reasons, 
however  indicative  of  spiritual  wisdom,  were  no4 
suttieient  to  authorize  the  consecration  of  an  ephod 
and  the  establishment  of  a  priesthood,  in  Ophrah 
It  was  the  inauguration  of  a  separate  sanctuary, 
the  establishment,  so  to  speak,  of  an  opposition 
ephod,  under  the  controlling  influence  of  Gideon 
The  ecclesiastical  centre  of  Israel  was  thus  severed 
from  the  tabernacle.  The  hero,  notwithstanding 
his  personal  fidelity  to  God,  evinces  herein  concep- 
tions of  Israel's  calling  too  subjective  to  be  secure 
against  disastrous  error.  The  result  soon  makes 
this  apparent. 

And  all  Israel  went  a  whoring  after  it.  The 
expositions  of  recent  interpreters,  who  ascribe  to 
Gideon  the  erection  of  a  golden  calf,  are  founded 

defrayed  with  this  money."  —  Wordsworth  :  "  The  im 
mense  quantity  of  gold  was  probably  bestowed  not  only  on 
the  robe  itself,  but  on  the  chains  and  ouches,  and  settings 
of  the  stones  on  the  shoulders,  and  on  the  breastplate,  and 
on  the  setting  of  the  stones  therein  ;  and  perhaps  also  in 
the  purchase  of  the  precious  stones  for  the  shoulders,  and 
for  the  workmanship  of  the  whole.''  —  Tr.] 

5   j"s1.    On  this  word  compare  Keil  on  this  passage 

[Kei!  remarks:  "  ^HS  2£s1  does  not  say,  he  set  it  up  ; 
but  may  as  well  meAn,  he  preserved  it,  in  his  city  Ophrah, 
3s-tin  is  nowhere  used  of  the  erection  of  an  image  oi 
statue :  and  signifies,  not  only  to  place,  but  also  to  lay 
down  (e.  g  ch.  vi.  37),  and  to  let  stand,  leave  behind,  Gen 
xxxiii.  15."  —  Tr.] 


140 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


n  utter  misapprehension.  The  use  of  rings  by 
Aaron  in  casting  his  idol,  was  simply  the  result  of 
his  having  no  other  gold,  and  has  surely  no  ten- 
dency to  establish  a  necessary  connection  between 
the  collection  of  rings  and  the  casting  of  golden 
calves.  The  establishment  by  the  recreant  Micah, 
in  the  closing  part  of  our  Book,  of  "  an  ephod  and 
a  graven  image,"  is  itself  evidence  that  he  who 
only  consecrated  an  ephod,  did  not  erect  an  image. 
Gideon,  with  the  words  "Jehovah  shall  rule! "  on 
his  lips,  cannot  intend  to  give  up  that  for  which 
he  has  risked  his  life  —  fidelity  towards  the  God 
who  will  have  no  graven  images.  The  erection 
of  an  idol  image  is  the  worst  of  sins.  It  was  from 
that  very  sin  that  Gideon  had  delivered  his  people ; 
he  was  the  Contender  against  Baal,  the  destroyer 
of  idol  altars,  —  the  man  who  would  not  even  suf- 
fer himself  to  be  made  Imperator,  an  idol  of  the 
people.  Gideon  continues  faithful  to  the  moment 
of  his  death,  which  he  reaches  in  a  good  old  age. 
If,  nevertheless,  Israel  goes  a  wThoring  after  the 
ephod,  this  was  no  part  of  Gideon's  wish  ;  still,  the 
snare  was  of  his  laying,  because  he  placed  the 
ephod  "in  his  own  house."  He  thought  that  by 
that  means  the  people  would  better  remember  from 
what  distress  they  had  been  delivered  ;  but  it  is  the 
nature  of  the  multitude  to  pervert  even  faith  into 
superstition.  They  come  to  Ophrah  with  worship 
and  prayer  for  direction,  because  this  particular 
ephod  is  there  —  not  because  they  seek  to  honor 
God,  but  because  this  is  Gideon's  ephod.  They 
regard  not  the  word  which  issues  from  the  breast- 
plate to  him  who  believes  in  God,  but  only  the  fact 
that  the  ephod  is  made  of  the  spoils  of  Midian. 
Thus  they  turn  Gideon's  faith  into  superstition ; 
and  Israel's  moral  strength,  instead  of  being  in- 
creased, is  weakened.  The  unwholesome  desire 
has  been  excited  to  present  worship,  not  in  the 
customary  place,  but  wherever  the  subjective  sense 
of  novelty  allures  the  worshipper.  If  Gideon  had 
not  consecrated  the  ephod  in  his  house,  it  had  not 
become  a  snare  for  Israel.  It  helped  him  indeed 
to  retain  the  leadership  of  Israel,  under  the  su- 
premacy of  Jehovah  ;  but  by  it,  discarding  as  it 
did  the  lawful  priesthood,  he  led  the  people  astray 
into  an  historical  subjectivism  instead  of  establish- 
ing them  in  their  objective  faith,  and  thus  prepared 
the  way  for  apostasy.  For  what  but  apostasy 
could  follow  at  his  death,  when  the  popular  faith 
became  thus  connected  with  his  person,  his  govern- 
ment, and  the  ephod  in  his  house  1  The  hero 
erred,  when  he  also  made  himself  a  priest.  His 
house  fell,  because  he  undertook  to  make  it  a  tem- 
ple for  the  people.  The  ephod  with  the  breast- 
plate became  a  snare,  because  the  God  of  Israel  is 
not  to  be  led  by  Gideon,  but  Gideon  by  Him  — 
even  though  there  be  no  ephod  in  his  house.1 

The  renewed  apostasy,  however,  for  which  the 
way  was  thus  prepared,  manifested  itself  only  in 
the  sequel.  As  long  as  Gideon  lived,  his  powerful 
spirit  kept  the  enemy  in  fear,  and  the  people  at 
rest.  The  effects  of  his  achievement  lasted  forty 
years,  although  the  hero,  refusing  dominion,  had 
retired  as  a  private  person  to  his  house  and  stayed 
there,  —  unlike  Washington,  who,  though  at  the 

1  With  this  explanation  of  the  ephod  and  its  conse- 
quences, the  old  Jewish  expositors  agree.  The  Midrash 
{Jalkut.  ii.  n  64)  gives  a  profound  hint,  when  it  opposed 
'.he  tribe-feeling  of  Gideon,  as  a  member  of  Manasseh,  to 

hat  of  Ephraim      However,  even  that  was  already  regarded 
!£  a  species  of  "  unclean  service." 

2  [Reil   interprets   the   name   as   meaning  "  Father  of  a 

King''    (Kiiniosvalrr),    and    says:     "  i^tTVIS    Ctt"} 


end  of  the  war  he  returned  with  "  inexpressibU 
delight"  to  his  country-seat  at  Mount  Vernon  on 
the  Potomac,  yet  soon  left  it  again,  to  become 
President  of  the  new  republic. 

Vers.  29—32.  And  Jerubbaal,  the  son  of 
Joash,  went  and  dwelt  in  bis  own  house 
The  surname  Jerubbaal  has  not  again  called  tor 
attention,  since  the  events  which  gave  rise  to  it. 
But  now,  that  Gideon's  work  is  finished,  the  nar- 
rative, with  a  subtilty  of  thought  that  is  surprising, 
speaks  of  him  under  this  name.  It  was  given  him 
because  he  had  overthrown  the  altar  of  Baal,  foi 
which  the  superstitious  populace  expected  to  see 
the  vengeance  of  Baal  overtake  him  (ch.  vi.  32). 
The  result  shows  that  Baal  is  nothing.  Gideon 
has  smitten  him  and  his  servants,  and  is  covered 
with  success  and  glory.  "  There  goes  "  —  so  speak 
the  people  among  themselves  —  "Jerubbaal  into 
his  house ;  the  greatest  man  in  Israel,  because  he 
smote  Baal."  Baal  is  impotent  against  the  faith- 
ful and  valiant.  Victory  constantly  attends  his 
enemies,  for  God  is  with  them.  May  this  truth 
never  be  forgotten  by  our  own  people  and  princes ! 
As  long  as  he  continued  to  live,  Gideon  had  every- 
thing that  ministered  to  fame  and  happiness  in 
Israel  —  many  sons,  peace,  riches,  and  a  "  good 
old  age."  The  last  expression  is  used  of  no  one 
else  but  Abraham  (Gen.  xxv.  8)  ;  for  of  David  it 
is  employed  not  by  the  Book  of  Kings,  but  only  by 
the  late  Chronicles  (1  Chron.  xxix.  28).  The 
"goodness  "  of  his  old  age  consisted  in  his  seeing 
the  blessed  results  of  his  great  deed  of  faith,  con- 
tinuing unbroken  and  unchanged  as  long  as  he 
lived.  Nevertheless,  the  narrative  already  hints 
at  the  shadow  which  after  his  death  darkened  his 
house.     In  Shechem,  a  concubine  bore  him  a  son, 

whom  they  called  Abimelech.  Ctt'*],  I  think,  re- 
fers not  to  Gideon,  but  indefinitely  to  those  about 
the  concubine ;  for  it  was  in  Shechem  that  the  name 
originated.  Gideon,  who  would  not  "  rule,"  much 
less  be  king,  would  not  have  named  his  son,  "  My 
Father  is  King."  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  but 
natural  that  the  vanity  of  the  concubine,  wheu  she 
bore  a  son  to  the  great  Gideon,  the  man  of  royal 
reputation  and  distinction,  would  gladly  consent  to 
have  him  named  Abimelech.'-  This  vanity  of 
Shechem  is  the  foundation  of  the  coming  trag- 
edy. 

Of  no  previous  hero  has  the  account  been  so 
extended.  It  is  even  mentioned  that  he  was 
buried  in  his  father's  sepulchre,  in  the  family  vault. 
That  also  is  a  sign  of  his  happy  and  peaceful  end. 
Here  also,  as  always  at  the  close,  the  name  of  the 
hero's  father  is  associated  with  his  own,  as  a  tribute 
of  honor  for  the  support  he  once  afforded  his  son 
(ch.  vi.  31);  beyond  this,  however,  nothing  is 
recorded  of  him.  Gideon,  as  conqueror,  dwelt  no 
longer  in  his  father's  house,  but  in  his  own  (ver. 
2<i)  ;  but  at  death  he  is  buried  in  his  father's  tomb. 
In  that  tomb,  the  glory  of  Manasseh  sleeps  ;  he  in 
whom,  tradition  declares,  the  blessing  of  Jacob  on 
this  grandson  was  fulfilled,  and  of  whom  the  Mid- 
rash  says,  that  what  Moses  was  at  an  earlier  time, 
that  Gideon  was  in  his. 

Is  not  the  same  as  IDti'VlS  K"1p,  to  give  one  a  name, 
to  name  him,  but  signifies  to  give  one  a  by-name,  to  sur- 
name him,  cf  Neh.  ix.  7;  Dan.  v.  12  (Chald.).  It  followi 
from  this,  that  Gideon  gave  Abimelech  this  name  as  a  sur- 
name suitable  to  his  character :  consequently,  not  at  hii 
birth,  but  afterwards,  as  he  grew  up  and  developed  charao 
teristics  which  suggested  it."  —  Te.] 


CHAPTER   VIII.  33-35. 


141 


HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

Gideon  puts  kings  to  flight,  pursues  them  like 
wild  beasts  to  their  dens,  slays  them  with  his  own 
hand  —  an  honor  not  allowed  to  Barak,  —  but 
himself  will  be  no  king.  Dominion  belongs  to 
God,  he  says ;  for  the  victory  was  of  God.  It  is 
not  majorities  that  make  a  king  in  Israel,  but  the 
call  of  God  by  the  mouth  of  his  prophets.  What 
Gideon  had  won,  was  not  his.  How  should  he 
take  God's  title,  to  whom  everything  in  Israel 
belongs  ?  So  long  as  we  render  God  what  belongs 
to  Him,  we  shall  also  have  what  properly  falls  to 
us.  \Vhen  Gideon  inaugurated  his  ephod,  he  de- 
sired an  honor  for  his  house  ;  and  this  only  honor 
which  he  sought  for  himself,  beyond  that  which 
he  already  had,  proved  the  downfall  of  his  house 
after  him.  Let  us  therefore  seek  first  the  kingdom 
of  God  :  all  other  things  will  come  of  themselves. 
So  soon  as  we  seek  to  honor  and  immortalize  our- 
selves beside  God,  our  labor  proves  vain,  and  our 
glory  falls  into  the  dust. 

Lisco  :  Gideon  refuses  to  accede  to  the  propo- 
sal of  the  people,  because  he  is  conscious  that 
everything  is  to  be  ascribed  only  to  the  Lord,  and 
that  it  would  be  nothing  else  than  arbitrariness 
and  self-seeking  to  accept  the  royal  dignity  without 
special  direction  from  above.  —  Uerlach  :  He 
rejects  the  offered  crown  from  genuine  fidelity  to 
the  Lord  whom  alone  he  serves  ;  but  another  temp- 
tation he  fails  to  withstand. 

[Henry  :  They  honestly  thought  it  very  reason- 
able, that  he  who  had  gone  through  the  toils  and 


perils  of  their  deliverance,  should  enjoy  the  honoi 
and  power  of  commanding  them  ever  utter  ;  and 
very  desirable,  that  he  who  in  this  grea*  and  criti- 
cal juncture  had  had  such  manifest  tokens  of  God's 
presence  with  him,  should  ever  after  preside  in 
their  affairs.  Let  us  apply  it  to  the  Lord  Jesus  ; 
He  hath  delivered  us  out  of  the  hand  of  our  ene- 
mies, our  spiritual  enemies,  the  worst  and  most 
dangerous,  therefore  it  is  fit  He  should  rule  over 
us ;  for  how  can  we  be  better  ruled,  than  by  One 
that  appears  to  have  so  great  an  interest  in  heaven, 
and  so  great  a  kindness  for  this  earth? — Bp. 
Hall  :  That  which  others  plot  and  sue,  and  sweat 
and  bribe  for  (dignity  and  superiority),  he  seri- 
ously rejects,  whether  it  were  for  that  he  knew 
God  had  not  yet  called  them  to  a  monarchy,  or 
rather  for  that  he  saw  the  crown  among  thorns. 
Why  do  we  ambitiously  affect  the  command  of 
these  mole-hills  of  earth,  when  wise  men  have 
refused  the  proffers  of  kingdoms  1  Why  do  we 
not  rather  labor  for  that  kingdom  which  is  free 
from  all  cares,  from  all  uncertainty? 

Wordsworth  :  Gideon's  history  is  a  warning 
that  it  requires  more  than  a  good  intention  to  make 
a  good  act ;  and  that  the  examples  of  the  best  of 
men  are  not  a  safe  guide  of  conduct ;  and  the  better 
the  man  is,  the  more  will  be  the  consequences  of 
bad  acts  done  by  him.  The  only  right  rule  of  life 
is  the  Law  of  God.  —  The  same  :  Gideon  is  num- 
bered among  the  saints  of  God  in  the  epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  (ch.  xi.  32) ;  but  the  saints  of  God  were 
men,  and  no  man  is  free  from  some  blemish  of  hu- 
man infirmity.  —  Tb.] 


Apostasy  from  God,  and  ingratitude  to  man. 
Chapter  VIII.  33-35. 

33  And  it  came  to  pass  as  soon  as  Gideon  was  dead,  that  the  children  [sons]  of 
Israel  turned  again,  and  went  a  whoring  after  [the]  Baalim,  and  made  Baal-berith 

34  their  god.  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  remembered  not  the  Lord  [Jehovah] 
their  God,  who  had  delivered  them  out  of  the  hands  of  all  their  enemies  on  every 

35  side  :  Neither  showed  they  kindness  to  the  house  of  Jerubbaal,  namely,  Gideon 
[Jerubbaal  Gideon],1  according  to  all  the  goodness 2  which  he  had  showed  unto 
Israel. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

p.  Ver.  35.  —  The  word  namely  is  added  by  the  translators,  who  supposed,  as  Bertheau  does,  that  the  writer  designed 
mce  more  to  point  out  the  identity  of  Gideon  with  Jerubbaal.     Cf.  the  Com.  —  Tb.] 

[2  Ver.  So.  —  rt3itSn"7D3  :    Dr.  Cassel :  trotz  alter  Wohltkat,    "  notwithstanding  all  the  good."     The  "  notwith- 
itanding  "  lies  perhaps  in  the  thought,  but  not  in  the  language.  —  Tb.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  33,  34.  And  it  came  to  pass  as  soon  as 
Gideon  was  dead.  The  fact  soon  became  mani- 
fest that  the  people  had  been  raised  only  by  the 
personal  character  of  Gideon  ;  he  is  scarcely  dead, 
before  they  fall  back  again.     The  narrator  says 

lharply  ^STO'l,  "  they  returned."  The  same 
word  which  elsewhere  describes  the  turning  of  the 
people  towards  God,  is  here  used  to  indicate  their 
passion  for  sin.  Ad  vomitum  redierunt,  as  Serarius 
well  remarks. 


And  went  a  whoring  after  the  Baalim,  ana 
made  Baal-berith  their  god.  Nothing  could  put 
the  stupid  thoughtlessness  of  the  people  in  a 
stronger  light.  They  have  become  great  and  free 
through  victory  over  Baal ;  and  now  they  again 
run  after  him.  Jerubbaal  —  the  contender  with 
Baal  —  has  just  died,  and  they  enter  into  covenant 
with  Baal  (see  on  ch.  ix.  4).  That  the  nations  in 
the  Baal-covenant  (Baal-berith)  kept  the  peace  to- 
wards them,  was  because  Jehovah  had  given  them 
victory,  —  and  lo!  ihcy  make  idols  their  god  !  The 
error  of  Gideon,  in  supposing  that  by  setting  up 


142 


THE   BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


his  ephod  he  could  preserve  the  people,  now  shows 
itself.  Since  he  is  dead,  in  whom  they  conceived 
their  salvation  to  be  personified,  they  think  neither 
of  the  spoils  out  of  which  the  ephod  was  made,  nor 
of  him  who  procured  them.  Ingratitude  is  the  pa- 
rent of  all  unbelief.  Thankfulness  comes  from 
thought.1  Israel  thinks  not  on  the  God  who  has 
delivered  it  from  all  its  enemies;  how  then  should 
it  think  on  the  human  hero  when  he  has  passed 
away.  They  withhold  obedience  from  the  Uod  of 
their  fathers";  what  recognition  can  they  have  for 
the  house  of  their  benefactor.  The.  ephod,  to  be 
sure,  was  still  in  Ophrah;  but  who  that  despises 
the  sanctuary  of  Moses  and  Joshua,  will  respect 
this  private  institute  of  Gideon,  when  his  voice  has 
ceased  to  be  heard. 

Ver.  35.  Neither  showed  they  kindness  to 
the  house  of  Jerubbaal  Gideon.  In  the  name 
Jerubbaal,  all  the  hero's  meritorious  service,  and 
its  great  results,  are  enunciated.  For  that  reason 
the  narrator  mentions  it  here.  It  serves  to  aggra- 
vate the  sinfulness  of  Israel's  ingratitude,  and  to 
show  that  he  who  enters  the  service  of  Baal,  will 
also  ignore  his  obligations  towards  those  who  con- 
tend with  Baal.  The  people  are  unwilling  to  be 
reminded  that  to  fight  against  Baal  brings  pros- 
perity. They  seek  to  forget  everything  that  ad- 
monishes to  repentance.     It  has  always  been  the 

1  [The  German  is,  "  Dank  komiat  vom  Denkcn."  It  is 
interesting  to  observe,  whether  the  author  meant  to  suggest 
it  or  not,  that  the  remark  is  sound  etymology  as  well  as 
psychology.     Qrimni  (  Wortert).  a.  pp.  727, 927)  derives  both 


case,  that  those  who  apostatize  from  God.  do  no» 
do  well  by  the  "  house  of  God.  —  Notwithstand- 
ing all  the  benefits  which  he  had  shown  unto 
Israel.  The  narrator  intimates  that  the  endeavor 
of  Gideon  to  perpetuate,  by  means  of  the  ephod, 
the  religious  and  godly  memory  of  his  deeds,  was 
altogether  vain.  For  let  no  one  imagine  that 
where  God's  own  deeds  fail  to  command  remem- 
brance and  gratitude,  those  of  men,  however  de- 
serving, can  maintain  themselves  against  the  sinful 
sophistry  of  unbelief. 


HOMILETICAL  AND   PRACTICAL. 

[Henry  :  Gideon  being  dead,  the  Israelites  found 
themselves  under  no  restraint,  and  went  after 
Baalim.  They  went  first  after  another  ephod  (ver. 
27),  for  which  Gideon  had  himself  given  them  too 
much  occasion,  and  now  they  went  after  another 
god.  False  worships  made  way  for  false  deities. — 
Scott  :  As  we  all  need  so  much  mercy  from  our 
God,  we  should  learn  the  more  patiently  to  bear 
the  ingratitude  of  our  fellow-sinners,  and  the  un 
suitable  returns  we  meet  with  for  our  poor  services, 
and  to  resolve,  after  the  divine  example,  "  not  to 
be  overcome  of  evil,  but  to  overcome  evil  with 
good."  — Tr.] 

dank  and  denken  from  ft  tlie  lost  root  dinke,  dane,  diinken," 
expressive  "  of  an  action  of  the  mind,  a  movement  and  up- 
lifting of  the  souL"  Thank  and  think  belong,  of  course,  U 
the  same  root. —  Ta.] 


FIFTH  SECTION. 

iHB  BSTJHPED  BDLE   OF  ABIMELECH,   THE   FRATRICIDE  AND  THOBX-BUSH  KINO. 


The  election  and  coronation  of  Abimelech.     Jbtham's  parable. 
Chapter    IX.  1-21. 

And  Abimelech  the  son  of  Jerubbaal  went  to  Shechem  unto  his  mother's  breth- 
ren, and  communed  with  [spake  unto]  them,  and  with  [unto]  all  the  family  of  the 
house  of  his  mother's  father,  saying,  Speak.  I  pray  you,  in  the  ears  of  all  the  men 
[lords]  x  of  Shechem,  Whether  [Which]  is  better  for  you,  either  [omit :  either]  that 
all  the  sons  of  Jerubbaal,  which  are  threescore  and  ten  persons,  reign  [rule]  over 
you,  or  that  one  reign  [rule]  over  you?2  remember  also  that  I  am  your  bone  and 
your  riesh.  And  his  mother's  brethren  spake  of  him  in  the  ears  of  all  the  men 
[lords]  of  Shechem  all  these  words  :  and  their  hearts  inclined  to  follow  [inclined 
after]  Abimelech  ;  for  they  said,  He  is  our  brother.  And  they  gave  him  threescore 
and  ten  pieces  of  silver  out  of  the  house  of  Baal-berith,  wherewith  Abimelech 
hired  vain  [lit  empty,  ;.  >.  loose,  worthless]  and  light  [wanton,  reckless]  persons,  which  [and 
they]  followed  him.  And  he  went  unto  his  father's  house  at  Ophrah,  and  slew  his 
brethren  the  sons  of  Jerubbaal.  being  threescore  and  ten  persons,  upon  one  stone  : 
notwithstanding,  yet  [and  only]  Jotham  the  youngest  son  of  Jerubbaal  was  left; 
for  he  hid  himself.  And  all  the  men  [lords]  of  Shechem  gathered  together,  and  all 
the  house  of  Millo  [all  Beth-millo],  and  went  and  made  Abimelech  king,  by  the 
plain  [oak]  of  the  pillar  [monument] :!  that  was  in  [is  near]  Shechem.  And  when 
[omit :  when!  they  told  it  to  Jotham,  [and]  he  went  and  stood  in  fon]  the  top  of 


CHAPTER  IX.    1-21. 


143 


mount  Gerizim,  and   lifted  up  his  voice,  and   cried,  and  said  unto  them,  Hearken 

3     unto  me,  ye  men   [lords]   of  Shechem,   that  God  may  hearken   unto  you.4     The 

trees  went  forth  on  a  time   to   anoint   a   king  over  them ;  and  they  said  unto  the 

9  olive-tree,  Reign  thou  over  us.  But  the  olive-tree  said  unto  them,  Should  I  leave 
my  fatness,5  wherewith  by  me  they  honour  God  and  man,6  and  go  to  be  promoted 

1 0  [go  to  wave]  over  the  trees  ?     And  the  trees  said  to  the  fig-tree,  Come  thou,  and 

11  reign  over  us.     But  the  tig-tree  said  unto  them,  Should  I  forsake5  my  sweetness, 

12  and   my  good  fruit,  and  go  to  be  promoted  [to  wave]  over  the  trees?     Then  said 

13  the  trees  unto  the  vine,  Come  thou,  and  reign  over  us.  And  the  vine  said  unto 
them.  Should  I  leave5  my  wine  [must],  which  cheereth  God  and  man,  and  go  to  be 

1 4  promoted  [to  wave]  over   the  trees  ?     Then   said   all   the  trees  unto  the  bramble 

15  [thornbush].  Come  thou,  and  reign  over  us.  And  the  bramble  [thornbush]  said 
unto  the  trees,  If  in  truth  [;.  e.  in  good  earnest]  ye  anoint  me  king  over  you,  then 
come  and  put  your  trust  [take  shelter]   in  my  shadow :  and  [but]  if  not,  let  fire 

16  come  out  of  the  bramble  [thornbush],  and  devour  the  cedars  of  Lebanon.  Now 
therefore,  if  ye  have  done  truly  and  sincerely,  in  that  ye  have  made  Abimelech  king, 
and  if  ye  have  dealt  well  with  Jerubbaal  and  his  house,  and  have  done  unto  him  ac- 

17  cording  to  the  deserving  of  his  hands  :   (For  my  father  fought  for  you,  and  adven- 

18  tured  his  life  far/  and  delivered  you  out  of  the  hand  of  Midian :  And  ye  are  risen 
up  against  my  father's  house  this  day,  and  have  slain  his  sons,  three  score  and  ten 
persons,  upon  one  stone,  and  have  made  Abimelech,  the  son  of  his  maid-servant, 
king  over  the  men  [lords]  of  Shechem,  because  he  is  your  brother :)  If  ye  then 
have  dealt  truly  and  sincerely  with  Jerubbaal  and  with  his  house  this  day,  then  re- 

20  joice  ye  in  Abimelech,  and  let  him  also  rejoice  in  you :  But  if  not,  let  fire  come 
out  from  Abimelech,  and  devour  the  men  [lords]  of  Shechem,  and  the  house  of 
Millo  [and  Beth-millo]  ;  and  let  fire  come  out  from  the  men  [lords]  of  Shechem, 

21  and  from  the  house  of  Millo  [from  Beth-millo],  and  devour  Abimelech.  And 
Jotham  ran  away,  and  fled,  and  went  to  Beer,  and  dwelt  there,  for  fear  of  Abime- 
lech his  brother. 


19 


TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  2.-^253  :  used  interchangeably  with  NtMS,  cf.  ver.  46  with  49;  2  Sam.  rri.  12,  with  ii.  4,  5.  See  also 
th    xx.  5,  and  Josh.  xxiv.  11.     Dr.  Cassel  :   Hen-en;  De  VVette,  and  many  others,  Burger,  "citizens." — Ta.l 

p  Ver.  2.  —  The  E.  V.  unnecessarily  departs  from  the  order  of  the  Hebrew,  and  thereby  obscures  the  antithesis  which 
is  primarily  between  "seventy  "  and. "one," and  secondarily  between  "sons  of  Jerubbaal"  and  "your  bone  and  flesh," 
thus  :  "  Which  is  better  for  you,  that  seventy  men,  all  sons  of  Jerubbaal.  rule  over  you,  or  that  one  man  rule  over  you  T 
Remember,  also,"  etc.  —  Tr.J 

[3  Ver.  6.  —  Keil:  " The  explanation  of  3»J3  T>?S  is  doubtful.  22?2,  anything  'set  up,'  is  in  Isa.  xxix.  3  a 
military  post  [garrison],  but  may  also  mean  a  monument,  and  designates  here 'probably  the  great  stone  set  up  {Josh.  xxiv. 
261  under  the  oak  or  terebinth  near  Shechem  (cf.  Gen.  xxxv.  4)."  De  Wettc  also  renders:  Denkmal-Eichc,  "monument- 
oak."—  Tr.J 

[4  Ver.  7 Dr.  Cassel  translates  :    "  and  may  God  hear  you."     This  is  very  well,  but  hardly  in  the  sense  in  which  he 

takes  it.  see  below.  Whether  we  translate  as  in  the  E.  V.,  or  as  Dr.  Cassel,  the  realization  of  the  second  member  of  th» 
address  must  be  regarded  as  contingent  upon  that  of  the  first.  — Tr.J 

[5  Vers.  9,  11,  13.  —  ^C^VIS  VlVinn.  According  to  Ewald  (Gram.,  51c.)  MjlVrnn  is  a  contracted 
hiphil  form  (for  ^71.07171),  tne  eecon(l  ^  being  dropped  in  order  to  avoid  the  concurrence  of  too  many  gutturals, 
and  the  resulting  inn  (cf.  Ges.  Gr.  22,  4)  being  changed  into  IPI""?  in  order  to  distinguish  the  interrogative  particle 
more  sharply.  Others  regard  it  as  hophal  (see  Green,  53,  2,  b).  But  as  there  are  no  traces  anywhere  else  of  either  of 
these  conjugations  in  this  verb,  it  is  commonly  viewed  as  a  simple  kal  form  =  ^ijlyinn.      Keil  seeks  to  explain  the 

anomalous  vowel  under  PT  by  saying  that  "  the  obscure  o-sound  is  substituted  for  the  regular  a  in  order  to  facilitate  the 
pronunciation  of  successive  guttural  syllables."  Dr.  Cassel  renders  :  "  Have  I  then  lost  [better  :  given  up]  my  fatness?  " 
But  as  the  notion  of  futurity  must  manifestly  be  contained  in  tile  following  ^np^rT^  the  ordinary  rendering,  "  Should 
1  give  up  ?  "  is  preferable.  —  Ta.  ] 

[6  Ver.  9.  —  D^traSI  Cribs  sn???  ^2"ltrS  :  "which  God  and  men  honor  (esteem)  in  me."  Coinpar* 
rer.  13.      Dr.  Cassei  renders  as  the  E.  V.  —  Tr.] 

[7  Ver.  17.  —  "T230  itt?3VnS  Tf^tTfl :  literally,  «  cast  his  life  from  before  (him) ;  cf.  the  marginal  reading  oi 
he  E.  V. :  i.  e.  "  d'is'r  garded'his  own  life."  — Tb.|  * 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  1.     Shechem  was  a  chief  city  in  Ephraim 
cf.  Josh.  xxjv.  1).     That  tribe  still  continued  to 


he  jealous  of  the  consideration  to  which  under 
Gideon  Manasseh  had  attained.  Though  Gideon 
was  now  dead,  the  ephod  was  still  in  Ophrah,  and 
the  house  of  Gideon  continued  to  hold  a  certain 


144 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES 


degree  of  authority.  The  narrative  distinguishes 
between  the  sons  of  Gideon  and  Abimelech. 
While  ch.  viii.  30  states  that  Gideon  had  seventy 

sons  by  "  many  wives  "  (0NtM),  ver.  31  remarks 
that  the  mother  of  Abimelech  was  a  concubine 
(ti'ST^Q),  in  Shechem.1  Just  this  son,  an  Ephra- 
imite  on  his  mother's  side,  bore  the  name  of 
Abimelech,  "  My  Father  is  King."  The  origin  of 
that  lust  after  power,  which  manifests  itself  in  his 
wild  and  ambitious  heart,  is  thus  psychologically 
explained. 

Vers.  2,  3.  For  they  said,  He  is  our  brother. 
Abimelech,  when  he  turned  to  Shechem  with  his 
criminal  plans,  was  perfectly  acquainted  with  the 
vain-glorious  lust  after  power  indulged  in  by  the 
Ephraimites.  He  knew  that  it  irritated  them,  to 
hear  of  the  "  rule  of  the  seventy  sons  of  Gideon." 
Gideon,  it  is  true,  desired  no  dominion,  nor  could 
his  sons  exercise  it;  but  the  centre  of  distinction 
was  nevertheless  at  Ophrah,  in  his  house,  where 
the  ephod  was.  The  negotiations  into  which  Abim- 
elech now  enters  with  Shechem  are  very  instruc- 
tive. They  show,  first,  that  the  distinction  which 
the  ephod  conferred  on  the  house  of  Gideon,  al- 
though it  implied  no  claim  to  dominion,  properly 
speaking,  was  yet  the  very  thing  which,  by  excit- 
ing envy,  became  a  snare  to  that  house ;  and,  sec- 
ondly, that  Shechem,  as  Gideon's  heir,  will  never- 
theless not  surrender  this  distinction,  but  desires 
to  transfer  it  to  one  of  its  own  people.  The  nar- 
rative is  throughout  of  a  tragic  cast.  Precisely 
those  things  which  should  exhort  to  greatness  and 
faithfulness,  are  shamefully  metamorphosed  by  sin 
into  incentives  to  treason  and  mischief.  In  the 
hearts  of  the  "  lords  of  Shechem,"  no  voice  of 
truth  or  justice  raises  itself  against  the  unnatural 
plan  of  Abimelech.  They  convict  him  not  of 
falsehood,  by  pointing  out  that  his  brothers  do  not 
exercise  dominion,  but  support  his  project,  because 
he  is  their  brother,  and  by  him  they  will  rule.  It 
is  manifest  that  the  whole  of  Shechem  is  morally 
depraved.  As  Abimelech,  so  his  kindred ;  and  as 
they,  so  all  the  Shechemites  were  disposed. 

Vers.  4,  5.  And  they  gave  him  seventy  sil- 
ver -  pieces  out  of  the  house  of  Baal  -  berith. 
Israel  was  forbidden  to  enter  into  covenant  (berith) 
with  the  nations  round  about  (cf.  ch.  ii.  2).  The 
first  symptom  of  apostasy  among  them,  was  al- 
ways the  inclination  to  remove  the  barriers  be- 
tween themselves  and  their  heathen  neighbors. 
The  concessions  required  to  make  the  establish- 
ment of  covenant  relations  possible,  were  alto- 
gether one-sided  :  it  was  always  Israel,  and  Israel 
only,  that  surrendered  any  part  of  its  faith.  The 
worship  of  a  Baal-berith  was  the  symbol  of  fellow- 
ship with  the  heathen,  whereby  the  command  to 
make  no  covenants  was  violated.  His  temple  was 
the  point  of  union  for  both  parties.  The  support 
of  Abimelech  in  his  undertaking  came  from  all 
the  worshippers  of  Baal-berith  ;  for  was  it  not  di- 
rected  against  the  house  of  Jerubbaal,  the  declared 
enemy  of  Baal  I     Such  being  its  character,  it  had 

1  .lotham,  also,  speaks  of  Abimelech,  with  special  con- 
tempt, as  the  "son  of  the  slave-woman"  (ver.  18). 

2  [Kgii.  :  "  Millo  is  unquestionably  the  name  of  the  for- 
treSB  or  citadel  of  the  city  of  Shechem,  the  same  with   the 

Towel    of  Shechem  in  vers.   46-49.      The   word    Wivtt 

(Millo),  as   also   the  Cbaldee  Sj"VvO,  'filling,' signifies  a 
rampart  formed   of  two  walls,  the  space   between  which  is 
filled  up1  with   rubblah.      There  was  also  a  Millo  at  Jeru- 
salem  ?  SWm.  v.  9  ■   1  Kgs.  ix.  15.     c  All  the  house  of  Millo,' 


moreover  a  proper  claim  on  the  treasures  of  the 
temple  of  Baal-berith.  What  a  disgrace,  when 
the  son  of  the  "  Baal-vanquisher "  takes  money 
from  the  temple  of  that  same  Baal,  for  the  pur 
pose  of  murdering  his  brothers  !  What  a  victory  of 
Satan  over  the  youthful  votary  of  ambition  !  And 
cheap  enough  was  the  price  of  blood.  The  idle 
rabble  who  hired  themselves  as  body-guard  to 
Abimelech,  received  a  silver-piece, )'.  e.  a  shekel,  for 
the  head  of  each  of  Gideon's  sons.  Howevei 
vague  the  impression  we  get  of  a  piece  of  money 
in  that  age  by  computing  its  equivalent  in  our 
coin,  it  is  nevertheless  frightful  to  think  how  little 
it  cost  (scarcely  more  than  half  a  dollar)  to  pro- 
cure the  performance  of  the  most  hom'nie  deed. 

And  he  slew  bis  brethren.  Abimelech  is  a 
perfect  type  of  the  tyrant,  as  he  frequently  appears 
in  Greek  history,  continental  and  insular,  and  also, 
in  more  recent  times,  on  Italian  soil.  Machiavelli 
(Prince,  ch.  viii.)  says,  that  "whoever  seizes  a 
crown,  unjustly  and  violently,  must,  if  cruelty  be 
necessary,  exercise  it  to  the  full  at  once,  in  order 
to  avoid  the  necessity  of  beginning  it  anew  every 
day."  In  support  of  this  maxim,  he  refers,  first 
to  Agathocles,  and  then  to  the  petty  tyrant  of 
Fermo,  Oliverotto,  who  in  order  to  become  master 
of  the  city,  caused  his  uncle,  who  was  also  his 
foster-father,  friend,  and  benefactor,  to  be  traitor- 
ously slain  at  a  banquet.  —  Only  one  escaped,  the 
youngest,  Jotham  by  name.  The  confession  of 
Jehovah,  which  this  nr.me  of  his  youngest  son  im- 
plies, evidences  the  constant  piety  and  faithfulness 
of  Gideon,  and  confirms  our  conjecture  that  not 
he,  but  Shechem,  invented  the  name  Abimelech. 

Ver.  6.  And  all  the  lords  of  Shechem  held 
an  assembly.  Gideon's  sons  being  murdered,  an 
election  of  a  king  now  takes  place.  As  the  elec- 
tors, so  then'  king.  The  noble  undertaking  had 
succeeded ;  the  house  of  Gideon  was  destroyed. 
What  a  contrast!  After  the  glorious  victory  over 
Midian,  Gideon,  though  urgently  besought  by  the 
men  of  many  tribes,  will  not  consent  to  continue 
to  be  even  their  imperator ;  now,  the  Shechemites 
raise  the  assassin  of  his  brothers  to  the  dignity  of 
a  king !  A  kingship  like  that  of  the  heathen  cities 
on  the  coast,  with  no  law,  but  with  plenty  of  blood, 
without  the  oil  of  consecration,  but  steeped  in  sin, 
is  thus  violently  and  vain-gloriously  set  up  by 
Shechem  and  its  fortress  (Beth-Millo  2)  ;  and  that 
too,  with  a  reckless  hardihood  as  great  as  that 
which  characterized  the  preliminary  murders,  in 
a  spot  consecrated  by  sacred  memories.  There 
where  Joshua,  before  he  died  (Josh.  xxiv.  25,  26), 
made  a  covenant  with  the  people  on  God's  behalf, 
where  he  had  solemnly  bound  them  to  the  observ- 
ance of  the  law,  and  where  they  had  promised  to 
obey  God  alone,  —  there,  at  the  great  stone,  set  up 
by  Joshua  under  the  oak,  two  apostate,  self-seek- 
ing cities,  stained  with  murder  and  unbelief,  elect 
a  son  of  Jerubbaal,  who  suffered  himself  to  be 
bought  in  the  interest  of  Baal,  to  be  their  king ! 
For  the  coronation,  the   narrative  tells  us,   took 

place     2^t?  p7S  DV,   at  the   monument-oak. 

are  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  citadel,  the  same  who  in  ver. 
46  are  spoken  of  as  * all  the  citizens  of  Migdol  or  the 
Tower.'"  Berthead  :  "The  high  plateau  of  Mt.  Geriziui, 
by  which  the  city  (Shechem)  is  commanded,  seems  to  offer 
the  most  suitable  site  for  this  Millo,  as  it  also  did  for  later 
fortifications  (Rob.  11.  277,  278,  comp.  p.  294).  This  location 
of  the  fortress,  at  some  little  distance  from  the  city,  which 
lay  in  the  narrow  valley,  would  explain  the  distinction  con- 
stantly maintained  in  our  chapter  between  the  inhabitants 
of  Shechem  and  the  house,  i.  e.  population,  of  Millo  or  th« 
Tower.''  —  Te.] 


CHAPTER  IX.   1-81. 


115 


near  Shechem."1  And  though  nothing  farther  is 
said  about  the  placet  it  may  nevertheless  be  in- 
ferred, from  the  connection  and  the  tragic  charac- 
ter of  the  occurrence,  that  the  narrator,  in  bring- 
ing its  locality  to  the  mind  of  the  reader,  designs 
to  make  the  shameful  character  of  the  transaction 
more  strikingly  evident,  just  as  throughout  this 
passage  he  constantly  writes  Jerubbaal,  not  Gid- 
eon, in  order  to  render  more  prominent  the  con- 
trast between  these  servants  and  that  great  victor 
of  BaaL- 

Ver.  7.  And  they  told  it  to  Jotham.  While 
the  preparations  for  the  coronation  are  in  progress, 
tii'.ngs  of  them  are  brought  to  Jotham,  the  last 
scion  of  the  stock  of  Gideon.  What  shall  he  do  ? 
The  whole  nation  is  fallen  into  listlessness  and  in- 
activity. The  horrible  massacre  has  called  forth 
no  rising.  Even  those  tribes  who  had  perhaps 
heard  of  it,  but  took  no  part  in  it,  continue  quies- 
cent. Sin  has  dulled  every  nerve  of  courage  and 
gratitude.  The  son  of  the  hero  still  receives  in- 
telligence;  a  few  helpers  are  with  him  in  his 
flight ;  a  few  others  perhaps  sigh  with  him  in 
secret :  but  beyond  this,  he  is  alone.  The  spirit, 
however,  of  his  father,  has  not  left  him.  While  be- 
low they  crown  the  fratricide,  he  appears  above,  on 
the  rock,  like  an  impersonation  of  conscience.  So 
the  modern  poet,  with  like  grandeur  of  conception, 
makes  Tell  appear  on  the  rock  above  the  tyrant. 
Jotham's  arrow,  however,  is  not  sped  from  the 
fatal  bow,  but  from  a  noble  spirit.  It  is  the  arrow 
of  parabolic  discourse,  dipped  in  personal  grief 
and  divine  retribution,  that  he  sends  down  among 
them.  Mount  Gerizim  was  the  mount  of  blessing 
( Dent  xxvii.  12) ;  but  through  the  sin  of  Shechem, 
it  becomes,  in  the  parable  ot  Jotham,  a  mount  of 
judgment.  Its  present  name,  already  borne  in 
the  Middle  Ages,  is  el  Tur  (the  Mountain).  It 
rises  to  a  height  of  eight  hundred  feet  above  the 
present  Nablus  (Rob.  ii.  276).  Jotham  probably 
appeared  on  some  projecting  point,  near  enough 
to  De  heard,  and  distant  enough  to  be  not  easily 
caught.3  Hearken  unto  me,  he  says,  and  may 
God  hear  you.  He  wishes  them  to  hear  his  par- 
able, as  he  desires  God  ( Elohim)  to  hear  the  coron- 
ation rejoicings  that  rise  up  from  the  valley. 

Vers.  8-21.  The  parable  belongs  to  the  most  re- 
markable productions  of  Israelitish  life,  not  only 
on  account  of  its  political  significance,  but  also  for 
what  may  be  called  its  literary  character.  Fable 
and  so-called  apologue  are  of  oriental,  non-Israel- 
itish,  as  also  non-Grecian,  origin.  They  spring 
from  a  pantheism  in  which  trees  and  animals  fur- 
nished symbols  for  expressing  the  popular  ideas. 
Although  rooted  in  the  religious  vivification  of 
nature,  their  employment  was  nevertheless  brought 

1   2--£p  is  most  probably  to  be  taken  as   rOv*E    or 

■■*  [Kmo  ( Daily  Bible  Illustrations :  Moses  and  the  Judges, 
T>.  365]  :  —  "It  will  occur  to  the  reader  to  ask  what  right 
the  people  of  Shechem  had  to  nominate  a  king,  by  their 
pole  authority.  In  the  first  place,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  the  laud  had  formerly  been  governed  by  a  number  of 
petty  kings,  ruling  over  some  strong  town  and  its  immedi- 
ate district  and  dependent  villages;  and  it  is  likely  that  the 
Shechemites  claimed  no  more  than  to  appoint  Abimelech  as 
such  a  king  over  themselves,  assuming  that  they  for  them- 
selves, whatever  might  be  the  view  of  others,  had  a  right 
to  choose  a  king  to  reign  over  them.  Besides,  Shechem 
was  one  of  the  chief  towns  of  Epbraim  ;  and  that  proud 
*ud  powerful  tribe  always  claimed  to  take  the  leading  part 
In  public  affairs,  if  not  to  determine  the  course  of  the  other 
tribes  —  except,  perhaps,  of  those  connected  with  Judah  in 
10 


to  maturity  by  the  pressure  cf  social  necessities 
In  the  East,  fable  and  tale  were  always  the  weap- 
ons of  mind  against  violence  and  tyranny  (cf.  my 
Edrlischen  Studien,  p.  15).  They  furnished  the 
people  with  individual  consolation  against  general 
misery.  In  their  original  appearance  among  the 
Greeks  also,  they  fail  not  to  exhibit  this  character. 
In  the  same  wav,  Jotham  speaks  to  the  tyrants  of 
Shechem  in  this  popular  language,  which  all  un- 
derstand. He  does  not  speak  like  a  prophet,  for 
he  is  none,  and  Baal  has  stopped  the  ears  of  his 
auditors.  He  does  not  even  speak  of  the  power 
and  mighty  deeds  of  Jehovah,  from  whom  his  own 
name  is  derived.  He  speaks  of  "  Elohim  "  and 
his  retributions  —  of  the  Deity  in  the  general  sense 
in  which  the  heathen  also  acknowledge  him.  He 
speaks  altogether  in  their  language,  popularly, 
with  popular  wisdom.  But  what  a  difference  be- 
tween the  moral  strength  which  justifies  Jotham 
to  put  forth  his  parable,  and  (for  instance)  the 
motives  of  the  Greek  Archilochus.  There  we  hear 
the  wounded  vanity  of  a  rejected  suitor ;  here,  one 
solitary  voice  of  indignation  and  truth  against  the 
tyrant  and  murderer.  By  this  moral  motive,  Jo- 
tham elevates  the  parable  to  the  level  of  the  divine 
word,  and  furnishes  the  first  illustration  of  how  a 
popular  form  of  discourse,  the  offspring  of  directly 
opposite  principles,  could  be  employed  for  moral 
purposes,  and  (in  the  parables  of  Christ)  become  a 
medium  for  the  highest  doctrines  and  mysteries. 
Jotham  gives  a  parable  and  points  out  its  applica- 
tion (from  ver.  16  onward)  ;  but  also  apart  from 
the  latter,  the  narrative  conveys  an  independent 
political  idea  with  a  force  which  has  scarcely  been 
equaled  by  any  subsequent  expression  of  it.  It 
manifests  a  political  consciousness  so  mature,  as  to 
surprise  one  who  looks  at  the  apparently  simple 
and  common-place  relations  of  the  time  and  peo- 
ple. 

The  trees  will  have  a  king.  No  reason  is  given, 
but  the  history  of  Israel,  to  which  reference  is  had, 
furnishes  one.  People  felt  that  in  the  dangers 
of  war,  one  common  leadership  was  important. 
They  supposed  that  their  frequent  sufferings  at  the 
hands  ot  Moab  and  Midian,  were  owing  to  defects 
in  their  form  of  government.  They  would  have  a 
king,  in  order  to  be  able,  as  in  their  folly  they 
think  they  shall  be,  to  dispense  with  obedience  to 
the  commands  of  God.  Gideon  says :  God  is  your 
Ruler.  The  apostate  people  will  rill  his  place  with 
a  king,  and  think  that  in  their  selection,  they  act 
in  accordance  with  the  will  of  God. 

Offers  of  kingly  dignity  are  seldom  refused. 
Solon,  properly  speaking,  never  received  a  tender 
of  royalty  ;  and  Otto,  Duke  of  Saxony,  the  father 
of  Henry  I.  was  already  too  old   to  bear  such  a 

the  south.  It  was  under  the  influence  of  this  desire  for 
supremacy,  that  the  revolt  agaiust  the  house  of  David  was 
organized  in  that  tribe,  and  resulted  in  the  establishment 
of  the  separate  kingdom  for  the  ten  tribes,  in  which  Eph- 
raini  had  the  chief  influence.  Indeed,  that  establishment 
of  a  separate  monarchy  was  accomplished  at  this  very  plac* 
where  Abimelech  is  now  declared  king.  Taking  all  this 
into  account,  it  may  seem  reasonable  to  conclude  that  the 
Shechemites  had  the  support  of  the  tribe  in  this  transae 
tion,  or  might  at  least  reckon  with  reasonable  confidence 
upou  its  uot  being  withheld.  Then,  again,  a  king  chosen 
at  Shechem,  and  supported  by  this  powerful  tribe,  might 
reasonably  calculate  that  the  other  tribes  would  soon  givt 
in  their  adhesion,  seeing  that,  in  the  time  of  his  lather 
their  monarchical  predilections  had  been  so  strongly  mani 
fested."  —  Tr.] 

8  [Cf.  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Boole,  ii.  209.  —  Tb 


146 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


burden  as  Widukind  says.  Ipse  vero  quasi  jam 
yravior  jnnis  recusabat  imperii  otitis).  The  good 
trees,  however,  notwithstanding  their  strength, 
will  no;  be  elected;  they  deem  the  species  of  roy- 
alty which  is  offered  them,  too  insignificant  to 
warrant  the  sacrifice  of  what  they  already  possess. 
The  olive  tree,  fig  tree,  and  grape-vine,  enjoy  suffi- 
cient honor,  happiness,  and  distinction,  not  to 
prefer  this  sort  of  coronation  to  their  present  ac- 
tivity. They  will  rather  continue  in  a  condition 
which  secures  their  personal  worth,  than  go  to 
"  wave  over  the  trees.  It  is  a  beautiful  image  of 
popular  favor,  uncertain,  unequal,  affected  by  every 
wind,  which  is  afforded  by  the  branches  of  trees, 
never  at  rest,  always  waving.  The  proffered  roy- 
alty is  dependent  on  popular  favor.  It  is  a  royalty 
which  must  bend  to  every  breeze,  if  it  would  avoid 
a  fall.  For  they  to  whom  the  office  is  offered,  are 
too  noble  to  use  the  means  necessary  to  maintain 
their  authority  when  popular  favor  deserts  them. 
They  must  first  have  lost  their  nobility  of  nature, 
before  they  can  follow  the  call  now  made  to  them. 
It  was  a  noble  king  of  recent  times,  who,  from 
similar  motives,  strenuously  resisted  to  accept  what 
was  offered  him. 

It  is  very  significant  that  this  doctrine  proceeds 
from  Jotham,  the  son  of  Gideon.  He  has  his  eye. 
of  course,  on  the  refusal  of  the  crown  by  his  father ; 
only  he  brings  the  negative  side  of  that  refusal  into 
special  prominence.  He  makes  it  evident  that 
even  then  the  fickle  and  discordant  character  of 
popular  favor  and  popular  will  was  thoroughly  ap- 
prehended. But  one  needed  to  be  the  son  of  a 
divinely  called  hero,  to  be  able  to  set  forth  with 
cutting  force  the  unprincipled  conduct  of  revolu- 
tionary malcontents.  Against  a  true  kingship,  as 
afterwards  established  in  Israel,  and  which  in  its 
idea  forms  the  highest  perfection  of  the  theocracy, 
Jotham  says  nothing.  The  people  that  applies  to 
Samuel  for  a  king,  is  a  very  different  one  from 
these  criminal  Shechemites,  who  attempt  to  get  a 
king  in  opposition  to  God.  These  latter,  for  this 
reison,  can  only  use  a  king  who  has  nothing  to 
lose,  and  is  worthy  of  them  :  whose  fit  symbol  is 
(he  thorn-bush.  Sin  loves  arbitrariness ;  therefore 
they  deserve  a  tyrant.  The  thorn-bush  is  the  type 
of  persons  who,  after  they  have  accepted  power 
ottered  by  bloody  hands,  are  qualified  to  preserve  it 
by  bloody  means. 
"  The  aesthetic  beauty  of  the  parable  is  also  to  be 
noted.  Trees  afford  the  best  representation  of  a 
republic ;  each  tree  has  its  own  sphere  of  action, 
and  no  one  is  in  a  position  to  exercise  any  special 
influence  over  the  others.  Whoever  among  them 
would  attempt  this  in  the  character  of  king,  must, 
so  to  speak,  leave  the  soil  in  which  he  is  planted, 
and  hover  over  them  all.  Their  will  would  then 
be  for  him,  what  otherwise  the  nourishing  earth 
is  for  all.  Any  productive  tree  would  thereby  lose 
its  fruit.  For  the  unfruitful  thorn-bush  alone,  the 
office  would  involve  no  loss.  The  fable  is  especi- 
ally beautiful  as  typical  of  Israelitish  relations. 
The  tribes  are  all  equal.  Like  the  trees,  they  all 
receive  their  strength  from  God.  If  they  with- 
draw themselves  from  Him,  in  order  to  crown  the 
thorn-bush,  they  will  experience  that  which  issues 
from  the  thorn-bush  —  namely,  fire. 

The  profound  significance  of  the  parable  is  in- 
,  xhaustible.  Its  truth  is  of  perpetual  recurrence. 
More  than  once  was  Israel  in  the  position  of  the 
Shechemites;  then  especially,  when  He  whose  king- 
Join  is  not  of  this  world,  refused  to  be  a  king. 
Then,  too,  Herod  and  Pilate  became  friends. _  The 
thorn-hush   seemed  to  be  king  when  it  encircled 


the  head  of  the  Crucified.  But  Israel  experienced 
what  is  here  denounced:  a  fire  went  forth,  and 
consumed  city  and  people,  temple  and  fortress. 

And  they  said  to  the  olive-tree.  The  olive 
tree  is  already  a  king  among  trees  in  his  own 
right ;  hence,  Columella  calls  it  "  the  first  among 
trees."  His  product  is  used  to  honor  both  "  God 
and  man."  His  oil  consecrates  "  kings  and 
priests,"  and  feeds  the  light  that  burns  in  the  sanc- 
tuary of  God.  The  olive  tree  is  the  symbol  of 
peaceful  royalty  ;  its  leaf  and  branch  are  signs  of 
reconciliation  and  peace :  hence,  Israel  in  its  divine 
glory  is  compared  to  the  "beautiful  olive  tree" 
(Hos.  xiv.  6). 

Denying  the  request  of  the  trees,  the  olive  tree 

says  :  "  Have  I  then  lost  (""W/iPUj  an  unusual 
form,  which  with  Keil  I  regard  as  a  simple  Kal) 
my  oil,  that  I  should  wave  over  the  trees  ?  " 
Has  Israel  then  lost  its  life  of  peace  in  God.  its 
sacred  anointing  through  God's  servants,  its  pious 
light  and  life  in  God's  law  1  Has  it  grown  poor  as 
to  its  God,  that  it  must  suffer  itself  to  be  governed 
by  heathen  arts  ?  The  product  of  the  olive  tree 
and  the  deeds  of  Abimelech  stand  in  the  shaipest 
contrast  with  each  other. 

The  same  result  follows  an  application  to  the 
fig  tree.  This  also  is  a  symbol  of  that  divine  peace 
which  fills  the  land  when  God  governs.  The  an- 
cients believed  that  if  a  wild,  untamed  bullock 
were  fastened  to  a  fig  tree,  he  would  become  quiet 
and  gentle  (Plutarch,  Symposion,  lib.  vi.  quaest.  10). 
Athens,  on  similar  symbolical  grounds,  had  a  sa- 
cred fig  tree  as  well  as  olive  tree.  In  Scripture, 
especially,  the  fig  tree  appears  as  a  symbol  of 
holy  peace,  as  the  prophet  Micah  says  (ch.  iv. 
4)  :  "  They  shall  sit  every  man  under  his  vine 
and  fig-tree,  and  none  shall  make  them  afraid." 
So  Jotham  makes  the  fig  tree  say  suggestively : 
Have  I  then  —  Israel  —  lost  the  possibility  of  sit- 
ting in  the  peace  of  God  1  Was  there  not  an  abun- 
dance of  rest  and  happiness  during  forty  years  un- 
der Gideon  1  shall  I  surrender  all  that  in  order  to 
fall  into  the  arbitrariness  of  sin !  For  it  can  act 
like  Shechem  only  when  the  peace  of  God  no 
longer  exists  ;  but,  in  that  case,  it  withers  away, 
like  the  fig  tree  rebuked  by  Christ,  and  ceases  to 
bring  forth  fruit. 

The  same  is  true  of  the  grape-vine.  The  oriental 
vine  attains  the  height  of  elms  and  cedars,  and  af- 
fords a  grateful  shade.  Hence  it  is  the  widely- 
diffused  symbol  of  government,  as  that  which  gives 
peace  and  comfort.  "  The  mountains,"  says  the 
Psalmist  (lxxx.  11),  "are covered  with  the  shadow 
of  it."  A  golden  vine  canopied  the  throne  of  the 
Persian  monarch.  Vines  of  gold  were  frequently 
presented  to  kings  in  recognition  of  their  sov- 
ereignty (cf.  my  essay,  Der  Goldene  Thron  Sa- 
lomo's,  in  Wiss.  Bericht,  i.  p.  124).  A  celebrated 
golden  vine,  mention  of  which  is  made  by  Tacitus 
also,  stood  in  the  temple  at  Jerusalem.  Tht 
Mishna  says  of  it :  At  the  entrance  to  the  temple 
porch  there  stood  a  golden  vine,  trained  on  poles ; 
whenever  any  one  consecrated  anything,  he  conse- 
crated it  as  "  leaf"  or  "  grape."  Elieser  b.  R. 
Zadok  related,  that  once  it  was  so  vast,  that  300 
priests  were  necessary  to  take  it  away  (Mishna. 
Middot.  iii.  8). 

The  olive  tree  said  that  with  him  God  and  men 
were  "honored;"  the  vine  expresses  the  same 
thing  when  he  speaks  of  the  "joy  "  which  "  God 
and  men  "  find  in  him.  Usually  all  that  is  said 
of  wine  is,  that  "  it  makes  glad  the  heart  of  man  ;  " 
it  is,  however,  also  over  w  ne,  and  wine  only,  thitt 


CHAPTER  IX    1-21. 


M'l 


the  "  blessing  of  God  "is  pronounced,1  and  Mel- 
chizedek,  as  "  priest  of  the  Most  High  God,"  brings 
"bread  and  -wine"  (Gen.  xiv.  18).  Nevertheless, 
the  phrase  "  God  and  men,"  is  probably  to  be  re- 
garded as  proverbial,  and  as  signifying  that  wine 
cheers  all  persons,  not  excepting  the  highest  and 
noblest.  Since  the  Middle  Ages,  we  [Germans] 
use  the  expression  Gott  und  die  Welt  —  God  and 
the  world — -in  a  similar  manner.  Hartmann  von 
Aue  (in  his  Iwein,  ver.  262)  says:  Verlegeniu 
mtlezekeit  ist  gate  und  der  werlle  kit  (mouldering 
idleness  is  offensive  to  God  and  the  world). 

The  transition  from  the  shade-giving  vine  to 
the  thorn-bush  presents  us  with  a  very  striking  con- 
trast. It  is  indeed  in  connection  with  the  thorn- 
bush,  that  the  narrative  displays  its  nicest  shading. 

While  the  trees  say  i^3  TO  to  the  olive  tree,  and 

SD  ./Q  to  the  fig  tree  and  vine,  unusual  forms  of 
the  imperative  which  convey,  as  it  seems  to  me,  the 
idea    of   a    respectful  petition,   they  address   the 

thorn-bush  in  common  style :  ^"^V  Tj7^.  When 
it  comes  to  calling  on  the  thorn-bush  to  be  king, 
the  respect  whichVas  felt  for  the  olive  tree  and  his 
compeers,  has  no  longer  any  place.  It  may  also 
be  remarked  that  the  shady  vine  is  often  at  no 
great  distance  from  the  thorn-bush.  Not  unfre- 
quently,  even  at  this  day,  fertile  wine-hills  in  the 
holy  land,  rejoicing  also  in  olive  and  fig  trees, 
are"  hedged  in  by  thorn-bushes  (cf.  Rosenmiiller, 
Morgenland,  on  Prov.  xv.  19). 

And  the  thorn-bush  said :  If  you  really 
anoint  me  king  over  you.  There  lies  in  this  the 
sharpest  censure  for  the  trees.  The  thorn-bush  it- 
self can  scarcely  believe  that  its  election  as  king  is 

honestly  meant  (•"I1??*?)-  Equally  striking  is  it, 
that  Jotham  makes  the  thorn-bush  speak  of  the 
trees  as  wishing  to  "  anoint "  him.  Anoint  with 
what?  With  oil.  But  the  "oil  tree"  has  al- 
ready refused  to  be  king  over  such  subjects !  The 
idea  is  :  they  anoint  with  oil,  the  symbol  of  peace, 
while  they  have  murder  and  the  opposite  of  peace 
in  their  hearts.  —  The  thorn-bush  declares  his  readi- 
ness to  give  them  all  he  has.  They  are  at  liberty 
to  shelter  themselves  in  his  shadow.  But  he  gives 
no  protection  against  the  sun,  and  his  branches 
are  mil  of  thorns.  In  case  of  disobedience  and 
apostasy,  he  will  cause  fire  to  go  forth,  and  with- 
out respect  of  persons  consume  all  rebels,  even  the 
cedars  of  Lebanon.  For  these  are  his  only  arts 
and  abilities  —  to  prick  and  to  burn.  jEsop  has 
a  fable  (No.  8)  which  teaches  a  similar  moral,  al- 
beit playfully  weakened.  It  treats  of  the  "  Fox 
and  the  Thom-bush."  The  fox,  to  save  himself 
0yom  falling,  lays  hold  of  the  thorn-bush,  and  gets 
dreadfully  torn  by  the  sharp  needles.  In  answer 
«o  his  outcry,  the  thorn-bush  says :  How  canst 
*hou  hope  to  lay  hold  of  me,  who  am  accustomed 
only  to  lay  hold  of  others. 

Jotham' s  application  in  ver.  16  forms  a  perfect 
parallel  to  the  speech  of  the  thorn-bush  in  ver.  15. 
A  minute  explanation,  that  the  Shechemites  are 
.he  tree*;  that  the  heroes  who  heretofore  bene- 
fited Israel  (not  merely  Gideon,  nor  as  the  Rabbis 
think,  Othniel  and  Barak  only),  correspond  to  the 
alive  tree  and  his  equals;  and  that  the  thorn-bush 
means  Abimelech,  is  altogether  unnecessary.  The 
scene  which  he  delineates,  is  it  not  transpiring  be- 
fore him  in  the  valley  below  ?     All  he  needs  to  do, 

1  [The  third  cup  at  the  Passover  meal  was  called  the 
11  Cup  of  Blessing,"  because  it  was  accompanied  by  a  prayer 
tf  praisi  aud  thanksgiving.     Cf.  1  Cor.  x.  16.  —  Tr.] 


is  to  call  their  attention  to  the  certainty  that  the 
threatening  of  the  thorn-bush  will  be  fulfilled  on 
them ;  for  that  is  yet  future. 

As  the  thorn-bush  says  to  the  trees,  "  If'  you 
honestly  anoint  me  king,"  so  Jotham,  with  crush- 
ing irony,  says  to  the  people  :  If  now  you  have 
acted  honestly  and  sincerely  in  making  Abime- 
lech king.  The  heathen,  as  well  as  the  worship- 
pers of  the  true  God,  believed  that  good  or  evil 
deeds  are  recompensed  by  good  or  evil  results 
Even  when  the  Persian  Oroetes  unlawfully  mur- 
ders the  tyrant  Polycrates,  and  afterwards  perishes 
himself  in  a  similar  manner,  Herodotus  (iii.  128) 
remarks  :  "  Thus  did  the  avenging  spirits  of  Poly- 
crates the  Samian  overtake  him."  It  was  main- 
tained that  the  tyrant  Agathocles  had  perished  on 
the  same  day  in  which  he  had  committed  his  hor- 
rible treason  against  his  confederate  Ophelias. 
This  belief,  prevalent  even  among  heathen,  pointed 
out  the  most  vulnerable  side  of  conscience.  Though 
they  turn  away  from  the  altar  of  Jehovah,  they 
will  not  be  able  to  escape  the  law  of  Etohim,  who 
is  even  now  listening  to  their  loud  acclamations. 
If  they  think  —  such  is  the  bitter  irony  of  Jotham's 
indignant  heart  —  that  the  collective  trees  (ver.  14, 

^r?"7  ?'  can  niean  it  honestly,  when  they 
anoint  a  thorn-bush,  then  they  also,  perhaps,  acted 
"  honestly  and  sincerely  "  when  they  called  Abime- 
lech their  king,  slew  the  house  of  the  hero  who 
regarded  not  his  own  life  to  save  them,  and  crowned 
the  murderer,  the  son  of  the  bondwoman.  Such 
"  honesty  and  virtue  "  will  not  fail  of  their  ap 
propriate  recompense.  The  words  of  the  thorn- 
bush  will  be  fulfilled.  The  sequel  will  show  the 
reward.  Israel  will  then  perceive  the  enormity  of 
that  which  in  its  present  state  of  moral  prostration 
it  allows  to  pass  unchallenged.  If  such  a  horrible 
deed  can  be  deemed  "good,"  he  repeats  —  and  the 
repetition  marks  the  intensity  of  his  grief —  then 
may  you  rejoice  in  Abimelech,  as  now  down  there 
in  the  valley  you  (hypocritically)  shout  for  joy  -, 
but  if  not  then  may  you  experience  what  it  means 
to  have  the  thorn-bush  for  king!  Then  will  sin 
dissolve  what  sin  began  ;  crime  will  dissever  what 
treason  bound  together.  Then  will  fire  from  the 
thorn-bush  consume  the  sinful  trees,  and  fire  from 
the  trees  the  tyrannical  king.  Thus  he  spake,  and 
thus  they  heard.  But  sin  and  excitement  drowned 
the  voice  of  conscience.  The  friendship  between 
them  and  their  king,  and  the  joy  they  felt  in  him, 
were  yet  young.  Israel  kept  silence,  and  Jotham, 
the  hero's  son,  fled  to  Beer.  Where  this  place  lay, 
cannot  be  determined.  Probably  in  the  south  — 
near  the  desert,  which  would  afford  the  fugitive 
security  against  Abimelech's  persecution.  Of 
Jotham,  nothing  more  is  known  ;  but  from  amidst 
the  tragedy  which  throws  its  dark  shadows  over 
the  house  of  his  father,  his  discourse  sounds  forth, 
an  imperishable  call  to  repentance,  addressed  to 
the  world  in  the  language  of  the  world,  and  an  ad- 
monisher  to  kings  and  nations  of  the  certainty  cf 
retribution. 

HOMILETICAL   AND    PRACTICAL. 

Abimelech  the  Fratricide.  Gideon  doubtless  ex 
celled  in  power  all  previous  Judges ;  the  deliver 
ance  wrought  out  by  him  surpassed  all  previous 
deliverances.  This  fact  perhaps  helps  to  explain 
the  greatness  of  the  shadow  that  fell  upon  the  land 
after  his  death.  The  story  of  Abimelech  displays 
before  us  a  terrible  contrast  to  the  government  of 
Gideon      It  exhibits  strength  attended  by  the  mosi 


148 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


abominable  lust  after  power,  energy  with  ungod- 
liness, victorious  talents  with  utter  criminality. 
Such  was  the  contrast  offered  by  Abimelech  with 
the  memory  of  his  father,  in  whom  strength  was 
united  to  humility,  energy  to  piety,  and  victory  to 
righteousness.  The  history  of  Abimelech  teaches 
that  siu  (1)  forgets  good  deeds;  and  (2)  inspires 
misdeeds ;  but  also,  (3)  that  one  abomination 
punishes  another,  even  to  destruction.  If  Gideon 
had  not  taken  a  concubine,  this  misery  would  not 
have  come  upon  Israel !  Why  did  he  take  her, 
and  from  Shechem,  a  city  whose  character  he  must 
have  known !  Why  did  he  allow  her  son  to  be 
called  "  My  Father  is  King  ! "  The  little  weak- 
nesses of  a  great  man,  become  the  great  tempta- 
tions of  small  men.  Against  the  murderous  fury 
of  sin,  there  is  no  protection.  The  true  sons  of 
Gideon  were  peaceable.  They  were  sons  of  a 
hero,  but  not  trained  to  bloodshedding  (ch.  viii. 
20).  Thev  had  among  them  the  ephod,  reminder 
of  Gideon's  victory.  They  were  related  to  Abim- 
elech, related  more  closely  than  the  Shechemites ; 
for  they  were  his  brothers,  and  brothers  by  such  a 
father:  but  it  availed  them  nothing.  "Piety," 
says  the  great  poet  (Goethe), "  is  a  close  bond,  but 
ungodliness  still  closer."  The  hand  once  lifted 
up  to  murder,  does  not  spare  its  own  brothers. 
Bloodthirstiness  beclouds  both  eye  and  heart.  It 
makes  no  distinction.  Thus,  sin  lies  lurking  at 
the  door,  until  its  victim  bids  it  enter.  Abime- 
lech's  conduct  has  found  imitators  among  Chris- 
tians. The  murderous  deeds  committed  since  his 
day,  some  of  them  at  the  bidding  of  church  author- 
ities, lie  like  a  blood-cloud  over  the  face  of  his- 
tory. Only  the  love  of  Jesus  Christ  can  penetrate 
through  it,  with  the  sunbeam  of  his  reconciliation. 

Abimelech  was  tyrant,  and  Jotham  must  flee. 
The  bloody  knife  reigns  and  the  spirit  which 
speaks  in  parables  and  lives  in  faith  is  banished. 
But  Abimelech  comes  to  shame,  smitten  by  a  des- 
perate woman  (ver.  53),  while  Jotham's  parable, 
like  a  winged  arrow,  pierces  all  fratricides,  from 
Abimelech  down  to  Richard  III.  of  England. 
While  Abimelech,  a  false  king,  passed  on,  bur- 
dened by  a  load  of  hatred,  Jotham  spent  his  life, 
as  befitted  a  mourner,  in  a  profound  quiet.  Seb. 
Schmidt  says,  that  "  God  knows  how  to  give  peace 
and  safety  to  those  who  innocently  become  faint- 
hearted, although  men  fail  to  espouse  their  righte- 
ous causes."  Such  is  the  preaching  of  the  word 
of  God  concerning  the  world's  condition,  (1)  when 
a  Gideon  reigns;  (2)  when  an  Abimelech  rules. 
The  government  of  the  faithful  is  the  salvation  of 
all;  and  likewise  sin  is  the  destruction  of  men,  not 
excepting  those  who  commit  it.  There  is  a  judg- 
ment.    God  is  not  mocked. 

Starke  :  Those  are  ignoble  souls,  who  seek  to 
reach  an  office,  not  through  their  own  gifts  and 
virtues,  but  through  the  favor  and  influence  of 
their  friends.  — The  same  :  To  lift  one's  self  up  by 
unlawful  and  sinful  means,  is  sure  to  bring  a  curse. 
The  same  :  Good  men  are  all  alike  in  this,  that 
they  do  what  is  godly  and  righteous,  because  they 
know  well  that  *hore  is  but  one  godliness  and  one 


righteousness.  —  The  same  :  The  unity  of  bad 
men  can  speedily  be  changed,  by  the  judgment  of 
God,  into  enmity  and  mutual  destruction.  —  Ger- 
lach  :  Jotham  stands  forth  like  a  warning  prophet, 
who  interprets  coming  events  before  they  occur, 
and  who  is  at  the  same  time  a  sign  that  the  Lord 
has  not  left  the  faith  of  Gideon  unrewarded,  not- 
withstanding the  terrible  judgment  that  overtakes 
his  house. 

[Bp.  Hall  :  Those  that  are  most  unwotthy  of 
honor,  are  hottest  in  the  chase  of  it ;  whilst  the 
consciousness  of  better  deserts  bids  men  sit  still, 
and  stay  to  be  either  importuned  or  neglected. 
There  can  be  no  greater  sign  of  unfitness,  than 
vehement  suit.  It  is  hard  to  say  whether  there  be 
more  pride  or  arrogance  in  ambition.  —  The 
same  :  The  Shechemites  are  fit  brokers  for 
Abimelech :  that  city  which  once  betrayed  itself 
to  utter  depopulation,  in  yielding  to  the  suit  of 
Hamor,  now  betrays  itself  and  all  Israel  in  yield- 
ing to  the  request  of  Abimelech.  —  The  same  : 
Natural  respects  are  the  most  dangerous  corrupt- 
ers of  all  elections.  What  hope  can  there  be  of 
worthy  superiors  in  any  free  people,  where  near- 
ness of  blood  carries  it  from  fitness  of  disposition  1 
Whilst  they  say,  "  He  is  our  brother,"  they  are 
enemies  to  themselves  and  Israel.  —  The  same  : 
Who  would  not  now  think  that  Abimelech  should 
find  a  hell  in  his  breast,  after  so  barbarous  and  un- 
natural a  massacre  1  and  yet,  behold,  he  is  as  sense- 
less as  the  stone  upon  which  the  blood  of  his 
seventy  brethren  was  spilt.  Where  ambition  hath 
possessed  itself  thoroughly  of  the  soul,  it  turns  the 
heart  into  steel,  and  makes  it  incapable  of  a  con- 
science. Ail  sins  will  easily  down  with  the  man 
that  is  resolved  to  rise.  —  Henry  :  Way  being  thus 
made  for  Abimelech's  election,  the  men  of  Shechem 
proceed  to  choose  him  king.  God  was  not  con- 
sulted, there  was  no  advising  with  the  priest,  or 
with  their  brethren  of  any  other  city  or  tribe, 
though  it  was  designed  he  should  rule  over  Israel. 

—  Scott  :  If  parents  could  foresee  their  children's 
sufferings,  their  joy  in  them  would  be  often  turned 
into  lamentations ;  we  may  therefore  be  thankful 
that  we  cannot  penetrate  futurity,  and  are  re- 
minded to  commit  those  whom  we  most  love  into 
the  hands  of  the  Lord,  and  to  attend  to  our  pres- 
ent duty,  casting  our  care  upon  Him,  respecting 
ourselves  and  them.  —  Bush  :  The  general  moral 
of  Jotham's  parable  is,  (1.)  That  weak  and  worth- 
less men  are  ever  forward  to  thrust  themselves  into 
power,  while  the  wise  and  good  are  more  prone  to 
decline  it.  (2.)  That  they  who  unduly  affect  honor, 
and  they  who  unjustly  confer  it,  will  prove  sources 
of  misery  to  each  other.  —  Kitto  :  There  are  in- 
deed legitimate  objects  of  the  highest  ambition, 
and  of  the  most  exalted  aspirations.  Crowns  and 
kingdoms  lie  beneath  the  feet  of  him  who  pursues 
with  steady  pace  his  high  career  toward  the  city 
of  the  Great  King,  where  he  knows  there  is  laid 
up  for  him  a  crown  of  glory  that  fadeth  not  away 

—  a  crown  of  righteousness  which  the  Lord,  the 
righteous  Judge,  will  bestow  upon  all  that  love  oil 
appearing.  —  Tr.] 


CHAPTER   IX.   22-30. 


149 


Discord  between  Abimelech  and  Sheehem.     The  intrigue  of  Goal. 
Chapter  IX.  22-30. 

22  When  [And]  Abimelech  had  [omit :  had]  reigned  [held  sway]  three  years  over 

23  Israel,  [.]'  Then  [And]  God  sent  an  evil  spirit  between  Abimelech  and  the  men 
[lords]  of  Sheehem  ;  and   the  men   [lords]  of  Sheehem  dealt  treacherously  with 

24  Abimelech  :  That  the  cruelty  [violence]  done  to  the  three-score  and  ten  sons  of 
Jerubbaal  might  come,  and  their  blood  be  laid  upon  Abimelech  their  brother  which 
slew  them,  and  upon  the  men  [lords]  of  Sheehem  which  aided  him  [strengthened 

25  his  hands]  in  [for]  the  killing  of  his  brethren.  And  the  men  [lords]  of  Sheehem 
set  Hers  in  wait   [ambuscades]  for l  him    in  the  top   of  the  mountains,   and   they 

26  robbed  all  that  came  along  that  way  by  them :  and  it  was  told  Abimelech.  And 
Gaal  the  son  of  Ebed  came  with  his  brethren  [on  an  expedition],  and  went  over  to 
[passed  over  into]  Sheehem  :  and  the  men  [lords]  of  Sheehem  put  their  confidence 

27  in  him.  And  they  went  out  into  the  fields,  and  gathered  their  vineyards  [held  vin- 
tage], and   trode  the  grapes,  and  made  merry  [prepared   harvest-feasts],  and  went 

28  into  the  house  of  their  god,  and  did  eat  and  drink,  and  cursed  Abimelech.  And 
Gaal  the  son  of  Ebed  said,  Who  is  Abimelech,  and  who  is  Sheehem,  that  we  should 
serve  him  ?  is  not  he  the  [a]  son  of  Jerubbaal  ?  and  \_is  not]  Zebul  his  officer  ? 
serve  the  men  of  Hamor  the  father  of  Sheehem  :  for  why  should  we  serve  him  ?3 

29  And  would  to  God  this  people  were  under  my  hand !  then  would  I  remove  Abim- 

30  elech.  And  he  said  to  Abimelech,  Increase 8  thine  army,  and  come  out.  And 
when  [omit :  when]  Zebul  the  ruler  [prefect]  of  the  city  heard  the  words  of  Gaal 
the  son  of  Ebed,  [and]  his  anger  was  kindled. 


TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 
[1  Ver.  26.  —  i  ?.     Ksn. :  '  Dai.  incommodi ;  to  his  disadvantage."     Cf.  the  Commentary.  — Tb-] 

[2  Ver.  28.  — De  Wette  :  :t  Why  should  we  serve  him,  we?  "     The  position  of  ^UHjH  at  the  end  of  the  sentence, 
ttarks  the  speaker's  indignation  at  the  thought  of  Sheehem 's  serving  a  son  of  Jerubbaal.  — Tb-] 

[8  Ver.  29.  —  The  pronunciation   PIS"!  (with  seghol)  is  perhaps  designed  to  give  to  the  imperative  piel  form  the 

strengthening  effect  of  the  ending  PT  -  found  with  the  other  imperative  (HK-il),  hut  of  which     7\*  verba  do   not 
Jdmit.     Cf.  Ewald,  Gram.  p.  511,  note.  —  Tb,.) 


EXEQETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.    22.    And   Abimelech   held    sway.     The 

narrator  says    not,   "  he    reigned "   (?T .  O),   nor 

"  he  ruled  "  fo&ti),  but  "127*1  :  Abimelech  was 

nothing  but  a  "^t?.  He  is  not  acknowledged  either 
aB  a  rightful  king,  or  as  a  military  chieftain  of 
Israel :  he  is  only  a  usurper,  whom  his  adherents 
have  clothed  with  arrogated  power.  And  though 
his  authority  is  said  to  have  been  "over  Israel," 
this  does  not  mean  that  it  extended  over  the  whole 
nation.  The  history  shows  that  his  authority  did 
not  extend  beyond  the  narrow  circle  of  the  moun- 
tains of  Ephraim.  Deference  and  consideration 
were  doubtless  paid  him  in  more  extended  regions, 
for  these  no  fait  accompli,  whether  it  be  good  or 
evil,  ever  fails  to  command. 

Ver.  2.3.  And  God  sent  an  evil  spirit.  Friend- 
ship among  the  wicked  is  only  a  league  of  vice 
against  others.  In  itself  it  cannot  stand.  Wick- 
edness, says  Hesiod,  prepares  its  own  punishment. 
Abimelech,  it  seems,  ruled  three  years  in  peace. 
Plutarch,  in  his  noble  treatise  on  the  purposes  of 
the  Deity  in  so  often  delaying  the  retribution  due 
to  crime,  finds  the  ground  of  it  in  the  wisdom  of 


Providence,  which  knows  the  opportune  moment 
for  punishment.  Here,  as  in  other  passages  where 
he  speaks  of  unholy  men,  our  narrator  names  the 
recompensing  deity  Elohim,  not  Jehovah.  Elo- 
him  sends  the  evil  spirit  of  discord  among  them  ; 
for  the  undeviating  law  by  which  sin  punishes  it- 
self, is  grounded  in  the  very  nature  of  the  Deitv 
It  would  be  the  destruction  of  the  justice  and  truth 
of  the  divine  government,  if  worthlessness  escaped 
its  recompense.  The  moral  universe  is  so  consti- 
tuted as  to  ensure  evil  fruits  to  evil  deeds.  The 
experience  which  here  presents  itself  is  one  of  the 
most  common  in  the  history  of  states  and  individ- 
uals. It  is  the  type  of  all  unnatural  conspiracies 
against  right,  and  of  their  issue.  It  is  moreover 
demonstrative  of  the  perfect  clearness  with  which 
the  divine  government  of  the  world  is  apprehended 
in  the  Book  of  Judges,  that  the  falling  out  of  vice 
with  itself,  and  the  stopping  up  by  wickedness  of 
the  natural  sources  < > t  it>  own  advantage,  are  rep- 
resented as  the  action  of  an  evil  spirit  sent  by  Elo- 
him.1 Sheehem  now  seeks  to  deal  with  Abime- 
lech, as  heretofore  it  helped  him  to  deal  with  the 
sons  of  Gideon.  Treason  began,  and  treason 
ends,  the  catastrophe. 

Ver.  24.     That  the    violence    ....    might 
come    home.      The    twofold   expression    of    the 


t  "  A  something  is  meant  which  operates  upon  the  in-    neither  a  disposition,  nor  yet  a  demon.''     Hoffmann,  Schrifi 
.ehertual  nature  (das    Geistige  Wesen)  of  mau  ;  therefore,    beweis,  i.  109 


150 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


•bought,  first  by  Wub,  and  then  by  VPiWb, 
serves  to  give  it  emphasis.  The  whole  history  is 
related  so  fully,  only  to  show  Israel  that  there  is 
such  a  thing  as  retributive  justice,  —  that  sin  bears 
its  guilt  and  punishment.  Blood  comes  home  to 
murderers  as  guilt.  Who  did  ever  experience  this 
more  terribly  than  Israel  itself,  when  it  slew  Him 
who  was  more  than  Gideon  and  his  sons !  That 
which  this  narrative  exhibits  as  coming  on  Abim- 
elech  and  Sheehem  in  the  course  of  three  years, 
the  history  of  the  world,  has  manifestly  fulfilled 
through  centuries  on  those  who  cried,  "  His  blood 
be  on  us  and  on  our  children  !  "  Both  are  pun- 
ished. Abimelech  and  Sheehem ;  for  both  are 
equally  guilty.  So  likewise  both  Jerusalem  suf- 
fered, and  the  empire  by  which  Pilate  was  ap- 
pointed. 

Ver.  25.  And  they  laid  ambuscades  for  him. 
What  it  was  that  gave  immediate  occasion  for  dis- 
cord, is  not  communicated.  But  Sheehem  found 
that  it  had  deceived  itself,  in  thinking  that  Abime- 
lech's  elevation  would  make  itself  the  virtual  ruler. 
It  had  fallen  into  the  hands  of  an  iron  despot, 
against  whom  the  cowardly  and  pleasure-loving 
Shechemites  did  not  dare  openly  to  rise.  They 
resorted  therefore  to  underhanded  stratagems  to 
make  him  odious.  For  the  robberies  committed 
from  places  of  concealment  become  perfectly  in- 
te.ligible,  and  fall  moreover  into  harmonious  con- 
tuition  with  the  expression  :n???^i  they  dealt 
treacherously"  (ver.  23),  when  they  are  regarded 
as  carried  on  by  the  Shechemites,  but  in  such  a 
manner  as  to  make  them  appear  to  be  ordered  or 
instigated  by  Abimelech.  Through  them  he  had 
become  a  murderer;  they  would  now  make  him 
seem  to  be  a  robber  and  highwayman.  But 
Abimelech  received  intelligence  of  the  deception. 
Henceforth,  the  peace  between  them  was  broken ; 
and  people  such  as  are  here  portrayed,  know  very 
well  that  now  it  is  time  to  be  on  their  guard 
against  each  other. 

Vers.  26-28.  And  Gaal  Ben-Ebed  came.  An 
adventurer,  probably  a  Shechemite,  whose  name ' 
perhaps  already  expresses  the  popular  contempt 
into  which  the  braggart  subsequently  fell,  having 
come  to  the  city  with  his  followers,  the  Shechemites 
thought  that  in  him  they  had  found  a  party-leader 
who  could  protect  them  against  Abimelech.  Ac- 
cordingly, they  held  their  vintage,  celebrated  their 

harvest-home  with  songs  of  rejoicing  (D,7:'v^')> 
and  then  observed  the  customary  sacrificial  ban- 
quet in  the  temple  of  their  god.  The  narrative 
seeks  to  exhibit  the  dramatic  contrast  between  the 
present  jubilant  enjoyment  and  the  approaching 
terrible  issue,  the  present  boldness  and  the  subse- 
quent cowardice,  the  passing  luxury  and  the  im- 
pending death  and  destruction.  Such  sacrificial 
feasts,  particularly  as  connected  with  the  temple 
of  the  "  Covenant-God,"  were  also  known  else- 
where (ef.  Dion,  fln/t'cora.iv.25,  on  the  "  covenant- 
feast"  at  Ephesus;  cf.  K.  F.  Hermann,  R.  A.  der 
Griechen,  ed.  Stark.  §  66,  4).  Among  all  nations, 
says  Athenseus  (lib.  v.  p.  192),  every  meal  was  re- 
ferred to  (iod,  and  He  was  honored  with  song  and 
praise.  But  these  feasters  in  the  temple  at 
Sheehem  had  no  thought  of  religion.  To  them 
applies  what   Plutarch  says,  in  the  introduction  to 

I  [The  author,  by  writing  Ben  (Ebed)  instead  of  trans- 
lating it  u  he  did  in  the  text,  seems  to  intimate  that  the 
whole    name,  Gaal   Ben-Ebed,  was  perhaps  the    expression 

>f  subsequent   contempt.      Gaal,  from      p2,  to  abhor,  to 


his  Symposium :"  when  barbarity  and  immoralit 
betake  themselves  to  wine,  the  banquet  comes  to  t 
disastrous  end."  The  fumes  of  wine  make  these 
men  rash  and  thoughtless.  That  which  they  ha. 
hitherto  kept  secret,  they  now  divulge.  Maledic- 
tions against  Abimelech  make  themselves  heard. 
The  scene  enables  us  to  estimate  aright  the  polit- 
ical wisdom  of  the  Corinthian  Tyrant  Periander, 
when  he  forbade  social  feasts  to  his  opponents 
The  speech  of  the  poltroon  Gaal  is  especially  re- 
markable. The  episode  in  which  the  narrator  ao 
quaints  us  with  the  divine  judgment  on  Abimelech 
affords  at  the  same  time  a  glance  into  the  hidden 
springs  of  political  life  in  a  city  like  Sheehem. 

Let  us  serve  the  men  of  Hamor,  the  father 
of  Sheehem.  The  apostasy  of  Israel,  after  the 
death  of  Gideon,  in  Sheehem  took  the  form  of  a 
covenant  entered  into  with  the  remaining  heathen. 
The  contrast  between  heathenism  and  the  relig- 
ious life  of  Israel  was  founded  in  the  existence  and 
the  characters  of  national  and  local  idol  gods  over 
against  the  true  God  of  Israel.  The  covenant  be- 
tween the  heathen  and  the  apostate  Israelites  in 
Sheehem,  found  its  expression  in  the  election  of 
Abimelech  as  king,  on  the  ground  that  on  the  one 
hand  he  was  Shechem's  brother,  and  on  the  other 
Gideon's  son.  This  covenant  now  breaks  up.  The 
wine -heated  Gaal  pronounces  the  word:  even 
Abimelech  is  still  too  much  of  Israel.  '*  By  what 
right,"  he  says,  "  does  Abimelech  command  our 
homage  1  Is  he  not  always  still  a  son  of  Jerub- 
baal,  the  enemy  of  our  god  ?  "  The  reaction  of 
heathenism  must  be  made  complete.  Sheehem 
must  hold  fast  to  its  own  ancestors.  The  families 
who  trace  their  descent  from  the  heathen  Hamor 
(Gen.  xxxiv.)  i.  e.  those  who  de:>ire  to  banish  all 
Israelitish  traditions,  must  be  the  masters !  The 
offspring  of  Hamor,  the  heathen  progenitor,  must 
not  serve  the  descendants  of  Jacob  !  When  the 
Tyrant  of  Sicyon2  sought  to  throw  off  the  influ- 
ence of  Argos,  he  expelled  from  the  city  the  wor- 
ship of  Adrastus,  the  primitive  Arrive  hero.  That 
was  his  way  of  declaring  himself  independent. 

Is  he  not  a  son  of  Jerubbaal  P  and  is  not 
Zebul  his  overseer?  Zebul,  who  in  ver.  3u  is 
called  the  "prefect  of  the  city,"  was  not  of  the 
party  who  now  feasted.  He  evidently  belonged  to 
tlie  Israelites,  who.  though  they  had  made  a  cove- 
nant with  the  heathenism  of  Sheehem,  were  not 
willing  to  serve  the  children  of  Hamor.  He  be- 
longed 'o  the  upper  families  of  the  city  ;  and  Gaal 
in  his  drunken  audacity,  disci  >ses  the  idea  that  he 
also  must  be  overthrown,  "because  Abimelech's 
tool." 

Vers.  29,  30.  Verse  29  give  s  the  further  speech 
of  Gaal  in  a  very  vivid  and  forcible  manner.  "  O 
that  some  one  would  give  this  people  into  my 
hands!  then  would  I  quickly  remove  Abime- 
lech !  That  is  directed  against  Zebul.  What 
Gaal  means,  is,  that  if  he  were  prefect  of  the  city, 
as  Zebul  is,  he  would  make  short  work  with  Abim- 
elech. 

And  he  said  to  Abimelech,  Increase  thine 
army,  and  come  out.  Gaal  does  not  actually  say 
this  to  Abimelech,  nor  does  he  cause  it  to  1*  said 
to  him,  as  many  expositors  think,  for  Abimelech 
hears  of  it  for  the  first  time  through  Zebul.  It  is 
only  an  animated  apostrophe  to  Abimelech,  in 
which  Gaal  boastingly  challenges  Abimelech  to 
loathe,  means  loathing,  Gesenius.  Lex. :  Ben-Ebed,  Son  of 
a  Slave.  Cf.  ver.  18,  where  Jothani  speaks  of  Abimelech  aj 
a  son  of  Gideon's  bondwoman.  —  Tr.J 

2  [Clistheuea.  See  Herod.,  v.  67,  and  Grote,  Hist,  r* 
Greece,  iii.  33,  seq.  —  Te.] 


CHAPTER   IX.   31-41. 


151 


prepare  himself  as  if  he  were  present.  The  in- 
habitants of  Shechem,  between  their  potations, 
doubtless  applauded  Gaal,  which  had  the  usual 
effect  of  emboldening  the  wine-heated  orator.  But 
this  drunken  jubilation  resulted  in  the  ruin  of 
Shechem  ;  for  it  reached  the  ears  of  Zebul.  His 
anger  kindled  ;  for  his  own  overthrow,  he  learned, 
was  to  be  connected  with  that  of  Abimelech. 

The  narrative,  in  its  admirable  simplicity,  allows 
us  clearly  to  trace  the  advancing  progress  of  that 
fatal  destiny,  in  which  secret  treachery  and  open 
dissipation,  boasting  and  jealousy,  conspire  to- 
gether to  precipitate  a  righteous  doom  upon  the 
city. 

HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

[Bp.  Hall  :  The  prosperity  of  the  wicked  is  but 
short  and  tickle.  A  stolen  crown,  though  it  may 
look  fair,  cannot  be  made  of  any  but  brittle  stuff. 
All  life  is  uncertain ;  but  wickedness  overruns 
nature.  —  The  same:  It  had  been  pity  that  the 
Shcchemites  should  have  been  plagued  by  any 
othc;  hand  than  Abimclech's.  They  raised  him 
unjustly  to  the  throne;  they  are  the  first  that  feel 
the  weight  of  his  sceptre.     The  foolish  bird  limes 


herself  with  that  which  grew  from  her  own  excre- 
tion. Who  wonders  to  see  the  kind  peasant  stung 
with  his  own  snake'  —  The  same:  How  could 
Abimelech  hope  tor  fidelity  of  them,  whom  he  had 
made  and  found  traitors  to  his  father's  blood  1  Nc 
man  knows  how  to  be  sure  of  him  that  is  uncon- 
scionable. He  that  hath  been  unfaithful  tu  one, 
knows  the  way  tu  be  perfidious,  and  is  only  fit  for 
his  trust  that  is  worthy  to  be  deceived;  whereas 
faithfulness,  beside  the  present  good,  lays  aground 
of  further  assurance.  The  friendship  that  is  be- 
gun in  evil  cannot  stand :  wickedness,  both  of  its 
own  nature  anil  through  the  curse  of  God.  is  ever 
unsteady.  —  The  same:  If  the  men  of  Shechem 
had  abandoned  their  false  god  with  their  false 
king,  and  out  of  a  serious  remorse  and  desire  of 
satisfaction  for  their  idolatry  and  blood,  had  op- 
posed this  tyrant,  and  preferred  Jotham  to  his 
throne,  there  might  have  been  both  warrant  for 
their  quarrel,  and  hope  of  success;  but  now.  if 
Abimelech  lie  a  wicked  usurper,  yet  the  Shechem- 
ites  are  idolatrous  traitors.  —  The  same:  When 
the  quarrel  is  betwixt  God  and  Satan,  there  is  no 
doubt  of  the  issue ;  but  when  one  devil  fights  with 
another,  what  certainty  is  there  of  the  victory  ?  — 
Tr.1 


Abimelech  appears  before  Shechem.    GaaVs  defeat  and  expulsion. 
Chapter  IX..  31-41. 


31  And  lie  sent  messengers  unto  Abimelech  privily,  saying,  Behold,  Gaal  the  son 
of  Ebed,  and  his  brethren,  be  come  to  Shechem ;  and  behold,  they  fortify  [excite] 

32  the  city  against  thee.     Now  therefore  up  by  night,  thou,  and  the  people  that  is 

33  with  thee,  and  lie  in  wait  in  the  field :  And  it  shall  be,  that  in  the  morning,  as  soon 
as  the  sun  is  up,  thou  shalt  rise  early,  and  set  [move]  upon  the  city ;  and  behold, 
when  [omit:  when]  he  and  the  people  that  is  with  him  [will]  come  out  against 
[to]  thee,  [and]  then  mayest  [shalt]  thou  do  to  them  as   thou  shalt  find  occasion. 

34  And  Abimelech  rose  up,  and  all  the  people  that  tvere  with  him,  by  night,  and  they 

35  laid  wait  against  [near]  Shechem  in  four  companies.  And  Gaal  the  son  of  Ebed 
went  out.  and  stood  in  the  entering  [at  the  entrance]  of  the  gate  of  the  city :  and 
[loi]   Abimelech  rose  up,  and  the  people  that  were  with  him.  from  lying  in  wait 

36  [from  their  place  of  ambush].  And  when  [omit:  when]  Gaal  saw  the  people,  [and] 
he  said  to  Zebul,  Behold,  there  come  people  down  from  the  top  [tops]  of  the  moun 
tains.     And  Zebul  said  unto  him,  Thou  seest  the  shadow  of  the  mountains  as  if 

37  they  were  men.  And  Gaal  spake  again,  and  said.  See.  there  [also]  come  people 
down  by  the  middle  [from  the  height]  of  the  land,  and  another  [one]  company  come 
along  by  the  plain  of  Meonenim  [cometh  from  the  way  of  the   Magicians'  Grove]. 

38  Then  said  Zebul  unto  him,  Where  is  now  thy  mouth,  wherewith  thou  saidst.  Who 
is  Abimelech,  that  we  should  serve  him?  is  not  this  the  people  that  thou   hast  des- 

39  pised  ?  go   out,  I  pray  now,  and  fight  with  them.     And  Gaal   went  out  before  [at 

40  the  head  of  ]  the  men  [lords]  of  Shechem,  and  fought  with  Abimelech.  And  Abime- 
lech chased  him,  and  he  fled  before  him,  and  many  were  overthrown  and  wounded 

tl  [many  fell  slain],  even  unto  the  entering  [entrance]  of  the  gate.  And  Abimelech 
dwelt  [remained J  at  Arurnah  :  and  Zebul  thrust  out  Gaal  and  his  brethren,  that 
they  should  not  dwell  in  Shechem. 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 
Ver.   31.     And  he   sent   secretly,     n?2~iri2- 
Although    the   form   ^ Q"]H   (cf.  iTEHEO  is  an 


unusual  one,  the  connection  suggests,  not  the  name 
of  a  place,  but  the  fact  that  Zebul,  though  "  prefect 
of  the  city,"  concealed  his  measure  from  the  citi 
zens.     The  messengers  whom  he  sent  must  have 


152 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


gone  "  secretly  "  (as  the  Sept.  and  Targum  trans- 
late), since  Gaal  had  not  learned  of  their  going 
(ver.  36).  How  were  such  intercourse,  as  ver.  36 
implies,  possible  between  Zebul  and  Gaal,  if  Zebul's 
cooperation  with  Abimelech  against  Gaal  had  been 
publicly  known  i  Nor  is  Zebul  to  be  regarded  as 
one  of  Abimelech's  generals,  but  as  a  Shecheiuite 
magistrate,  wlio  is  incensed  because  Gaal  plots  his 
own  overthrow.      It  may  be  confidently  assumed 

that  if  H!3~iJ  were  the  name  of  a  place,  ver.  34 

would  read :  "  And  Abimelech  rose  up,    i"TO~)WD, 

from  Tormah."  nO"1£l,  however,  conveys  not 
only  the  idea  of  secrecy,  but  of  secrecy  combined 
with  deceit,  secret  deceit ;  and  such  was  certainly 
the  character  of  Zebul's  act.1  It  is  also  to  be  no- 
ticed that  in  his  message  Zebul  does  not  accuse  the 
city,  but  only  Gaal  as  exciting  the  city  against 
Abimelech.  As  magistrate,  he  does  not  wish  to 
bring  the  wrath  of  Abimelech  upon  the  city,  but 
only  upon  his  rival.  Very  graphic  is  the  expres- 
sion Q,^-£>  commonly  used  of  besiegers.  Gaal 
and  his  brethren,  says  Zebul,  press  the  city  like  be- 
siegers, to  induce  it  to  rise  against  thee.  Their 
expulsion  is  therefore  all  that  is  necessary.  But 
since  this  is  not  the  whole  truth  —  for  Shechem,  as 
we  have  seen,  first  elected  Gaal  because  it  had  al- 
ready offended  against  Abimelech  —  it  is  evident 
that  Zebul's  policy  of  exciting  Abimelech  against 
Gaal  only,  is  dictated  by  regard  to  his  own  inter- 
ests. 

Vers.  32-41.  And  move  upon  the  city.  The 
place  of  Abimelech's  abode  is  not  given ;  but  he 
was  in  the  midst  of  his  army.  He  must  have  been 
some  distance  from  Shechem,  since  he  needed  a 
part  of  the  night  (ver.  32)  to  get  within  easy  reach 
of  it  He  is  to  place  himself  in  ambush,  so  as  not 
to  be  prematurely  observed.  Abimelech  follows 
the  counsel.  In  the  morning,  Gaal  and  Zebul 
naturally  betake  themselves  to  the  gate  of  the  city  : 
Gaal,  because  it  h;id  become  his  business  to  watch 
over  Shechem ;  Zebul,  because  of  his  office  as 
magistrate.  Gaal,  who  has  no  misgivings  —  for 
he  has  slept  away  the  effects  of  the  wine  —  sees 
troops  descending  from  the  mountains.  Zebul  thinks 
it  yet  too  soon  to  tell  him  the  truth  ;  he  will  give 
Abimelech  time  first  to  bring  up  all  his  forces ; 
and  therefore  deceives  and  at  the  same  time  mocks 

1  [Keu  :     ..  nD~I.FI3  :  either  with  deceit    (nt3~in. 
t   :  t  :  t  , :  t  ' 

from  (™TQ"^V  i.  ?.  exercising  deceit,  inasmuch  as  he  had 

t  t  ' 
listened   quietly  and   apparently   with  approbation    to  the 
speech  of  Gaal ;  or,  in  Tormah,  —  noting  a  locality,  —  in 

which  case  nQ"!^!  would  be  an  error  of  transcription  for 
"!J3"1M   =  na^lS  Cver  41).     The  LXX    and  the  Tar- 


Gaal  by  saying,  "  It  is  the  shadow  of  the  moun- 
tains that  thou  seest."  Immediately,  however,  a 
body  of  troops  is  seen  advancing  whose  identity  as 
such  cannot  be  mistaken.  By  the  "  tops  of  the 
mountains  "  we  are  to  understand  the  more  dis- 
tant mountains;  by  the  "height  ("WSto)  of  the 
land,"  a  nearer  hill,  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of 
the  city  (the  "navel"  of  the  land);  and  by  the 
"  Elon  Meonenim,"  a  dusky  forest  ("Magicians' 
Grove  "),  against  the  near  horizon.  From  all  these 
points,  commanding  the  avenues  to  the  city,  troops 
of  soldiers  advanced,  to  the  consternation  of  Gaal 
and  the  surprise  of  the  citizens.  Now  Zebul  throws 
off  his  mask,  and  reminds  Gaal  of  his  previous  au- 
dacity. The  latter  is  compelled  to  try  his  fortunes 
in  battle.  At  the  head  of  the  "  lords  of  Shechem," 
he  inarches  out  against  Abimelech.  But  he  is  far 
from  being  a  match  for  him.  He  is  utterly  unable 
to  stand  his  ground.  A  terrible  rout  begins. 
Gaal  saves  himself  through  the  open  gate  ;  but  the 
road,  up  to  the  very  threshold  of  the  gate,  is  cov- 
ered with  the  slain.  His  boasting  has  a  miserable 
end.  His  authority  is  gone.  Zebul,  who  pre- 
viously did  not  dare  insist  on  his  expulsion,  now 
carries  it  through.  He  persuades  the  timid  and 
terrified  Shechemites  that  they  will  thus  allay  the 
anger  of  Abimelech.  He  believes  it  himself;  for 
he  has  carefully  thrown  the  whole  blame  on  Gaal. 
Abimelech's  conduct  seems  to  favor  this  persua- 
sion ;  lor  he  does  not  prosecute  the  attack,  but  re- 
tires to  Arumah.2  But  what  a  delusion !  The 
banished  Gaal  is  the  only  one  who  escapes  destruc- 
tion. 

HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

[Bp.  Hall  :  Never  any  man  was  so  ill,  as  not 
to  have  oome  favorers :  Abimelech  hath  a  Zebul 
in  the  midst  of  Shechem.  Lightly  all  treasons 
are  betrayed,  even  with  some  of  their  own. — 
Henry-'  Proud  and  haughty  people  are  often 
made,  in  a  little  time,  to  dread  those  whom  they 
had  most  despised.  Justly  are  the  insolent  thus 
insulted  over.  —  The  same:  Most  people  judge 
of  men's  fitness  for  business  by  their  success,  anc 
he  that  does  not  speed  well,  is  concluded  not  to  dc 
well.  Gaal's  interest  in  Shechem  is  soon  at  an 
end,  nor  do  we  ever  hear  of  him  anv  more.  — 
Tr.] 

gum  take  the  word  as  a  common  noun  :  h>  Kpv<i>fi,  secretly  j 
so  Raschi,  and  most  of  the  older  expositors,  while  R.  Kim- 
chi,  the  Elder,  decides  for  its  being  a  nom.  propr.  No 
certain  decision  can  be  arrived  at." — Tr.J 

2  The  site  of  Arumah  cannot  be  definitely  determined. 
The  probability,  however,  is  that  it  was  somewhere  on  the 
hills,  not  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  Shechem,  but  yet 
near  enough  for  the  sudden  assault  on  Shechem  which  fol- 
lowed. 


The  destruction  of  Shechem,  and  burning  of  the  "  Tower  of  Shechem"   The  siegt 
of  Thebez,  and  Abimelech's  death. 

Chapter  IX.     42-57. 


42       And  it  came  to  pass  on  the  morrow,  that  the  people  went  out  into  the  field  ;  and 
13  they  told  Abimelech.  And  he  took  the  [t.  t.  his]  people,  and  divided  them  into  three 


CHAPTER   IX      42-57.  153 


companies,  and  laid  wait  in  the  field,  and  looked,  and  behold,  the  people  were  come 
[coming]   forth   out  of  the  city  ;  and  he  rose  up  against  them,  and  smote  them. 

44  And  Abimelech,  and  the  company  [companies]  that  was  [were]  with  him,  rushed 
forward,1  and  stood  [placed  themselves]  in  the  entering  [at  the  entrance]  of  the 
gate  of  the  city  :  and  the  two   other  companies  ran  [advanced]  upon  all  the  pt  ople 

45  that  were  in  the  fields,  and  slew  them.  And  Abimelech  fought  against  the  city  all 
that  day ;  and  he  took   the  city,  and  slew  the   people  that  was  therein,  and   beat 

46  [tore]  down  the  city,  and  sowed  it  with  salt.  And  when  all  the  men  [lords]  of  the 
tower  of  Shechem  heard  that,  they  entered  into  an  [the]  hold  -  of  the  house  of  the 

47  god  Berith   [house  of  El-Berith].     And   it  was  told  Abimelech,  that  all  the   men 

48  [lords]  of  the  tower  of  Shechem  were  gathered  together  [there].  And  Abimelech 
gat  him  up  to  Mount  Zalmon,  he  and  all  the  people  that  were  with  him  ;  and  Abim- 
elech took  an  axe  in  his  hand,  and  cut  down  a  bough  from  the  trees,  and  took  it 
[lifted  it  up],  and  laid  it  on  his  shoulder,  and  said  unto  the  people   that  were  with 

49  liim.  What  ye  have  seen  me  do,  make  haste,  and  do  as  I  have  done.  And  all  the 
people  likewise  cut  down  [off]  every  man  his  bough,  and  followed  Abimelech,  and 
put  them  to  the  hold,  and  set   the  hold  on  fire   upon  3  them  :  so  that   [and]  all  the 

00  men  of  the  tower  of  Shechem  died  also,  about  a  thousand  men  and  women.  Then 
went  Abimelech  to  Thebez,  and  encamped  against  [laid  siege  to]  Thebez,  and  took  it. 

51  But  there  was  a  strong  tower  within  [in  the  midst  of]  the  city,  and  thither  tied  all 
the  men  and  women,  and  all  they  [the  lords]  of  the  city,  and  shut  it  to  [after]  them, 

52  and  gat  them  up  to  the  top  [roof]  of  the  tower.  And  Abimelech  came  unto  the 
tower,  and  fought  against  it,  and  went  hard  [approached]  unto  the  door  of  the  tower 

53  to  burn  it  with  fire.  And  a  certain  woman  cast  a  piece  of  a  [cast  an  upper]  mill- 
stone upon  Abimelech's  head,  and  all  to  [omit :  all  to]  4  brake  his  skull 6  [to  pieces]. 

54  Then  he  called  hastily  unto  the  young  man  his  armour-bearer,  and  said  unto  him, 
Draw  thy  sword,  and  slay  me  [put  me  to  death],  that  men  say  not  of  me,  A  woman 

55  slew  him.  And  his  young  man  thrust  him  through,  and  he  died.  And  when  the 
men   of  Israel  saw  that  Abimelech  was  dead,  they  departed  every  man   unto  his 

56  place.     Thus  God  rendered  [caused  to  return]  the  wickedness  of  Abimelech,  which 

57  he  did  unto  his  father,  in  slaying  his  seventy  brethren  :  And  all  the  evil  of  the 
men  of  Shechem  did  God  render  [cause  to  return]  upon  their  heads :  and  upon 
them  came  the  curse  of  Jotham  the  son  of  Jerubbaal. 

TEXTUAL  AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

\l  Ver.  44.  —  ^t^tPS  :  spread  out,  sc.  in  hostile  array.  The  same  word  occurs  ver.  33  ;  and  in  both  places  seems  to 
-ootrast  the  expanded  form  of  a  body  of  men  freely  advancing,  with  its  contraction  when  lying  in  ambush.  The  verse 
is  somewhat  difficult.  Dr.  Cassel  renders  it  as  follows  :  "  And  Abimelech  and  the  companies  that  were  with  him,  spread 
themselves  out.  Part  stood  [took  their  stand]  at  the  entrance  of  the  gate  of  the  city,  and  two  companies  threw  them- 
selves on  all  that  were  in  the  field,  and  slew  them."  —  Ta.] 

[2  Ver.  46.  —  rP"^¥.  Tue  meaning  of  this  word  is  doubtful.  Our  author  renders  it  Halle  ;  De  Wette,  Veslt,  strong 
hold  ;  Keil  suggests  Zicinger  (cf.  arx,  from  arcto),  citadel,  fortress  ;  while  according  to  Bertheau,  ver.  49  (where  he  would 
render:  and  they  put  the  boughs  on  the  r"P™^,  and  infer  thence  that  the  place  bearing  this  name  was  /oip|,  "rather 
implies  a  cellar-like  place,  some  sort  of  hollow.  Cf.  1  Sam.  xiii.  6,  the  only  other  passage  where  the  word  occurs,  and 
where  it  is  coiyoined  with  caves  and  clefts  of  the  rocks."  — Ta.] 

[3  Ver.  49. —  E<"P  .2  :   Cassel,  nvrith  them,1'  i.  e.  the   boughs.     But  this  rendering  will  scarcely  find  favor.    De 

Wette:   "over  them."  i".  e.  the  people  in  the  ?"1^V.  —  Tr.] 
[4  Ver.  53.  —  "  All  to  brake,"  is  old  English  for  "entirely  brake."     Cf.  Webster,  Did.,  under  "all,"  adv.  — Ta.) 
[6  Ver.  53.  —  "IP  .'3  '2,  from  H /3  V2,  is  undoubtedly  to  be  read  *lj?ly3^2,    which  reading,  according  to  Bex 

iieau  and  Keil,  is  found  in  the  edition  of  it.  Nora,  Mantua,  1742-44.  —  Tr.] 


EXEOETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  42—44.  The  people  went  out  into  the 
Held.  Sin  is  blind,  and  must  be,  for  only  repent- 
ance opens  the  eyes.     The  people  of  Shechem,  not 


to  silence  it  by  persuading  himself  that  the  guilt  tc 
which  he  shuts   his  own  eyes  is  also  unseen   by 
others.     He  thinks  only  of  sin  and   its   pleasure, 
not  of  its  punishment.     The  Shechemites  have  for-1 
gotten,  to  their  own  hurt,  what  Jotham  told  them. 


withstanding  their  treasonable  practices,  actually  |  The  thorn-bush  emiia  fire,  and  consumes  those  who 
hink  that  the  matter  is  now  settled,  and  that  Abim-  despise  it.  Abimelech  only  tarries  in  his  concealed 
eleeh  is  content  with  the  banishment  of  Gaal.  It  height,  until  he  has  inspired  the  foolish  Shechem- 
is  a  constant  characteristic  of  the  natural  man,  ites  with  confidence.  With  true  Punic  strategy, 
±at  he  either  does  not  hear  his  conscience,  or  seeks   he  allures  them  to  the  open  fields,  tlwre  to  attenr 


154 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


to  their  labor,  as  if  all  were  peace,  and  nothing 
more  were  to  be  feared.  Caught  in  the  snare, 
their  retreat  is  cut  off.  One  of  Abimelech's  com- 
panies holds  the  gate,  while  others  deal  destruction 
to  all  in  the  fields.  Similar  strategies  are  told  of 
Hamilcar,  the  Carthaginian,  against  Agrigentum, 
and  of  Hannibal  against  Saguntum  (Frontinus, 
lib.  iii.  10, 1 ). 

Ver.  45.  He  destroyed  the  city  and  sowed  it 
with  salt.  Notwithstanding  Abimelech's  sangui- 
nary disposition,  it  would  be  difficult  to  account  for 
his  savage  treatment  of  Shechem,  if  we  did  not 
remember  that  the  city  stood  in  the  covenant  of 
Baal-berith  with  him.  The  very  money  that  as- 
sisted him  to  the  throne,  had  been  taken  from  the 
temple  of  this  god.  Now,  among  oriental  nations, 
as  among  others,  infidelity  to  covenant  obligations 
was  the  greatest  of  crimes.  The  God  of  Israel, 
also,  who  made  his  divine  covenant  with  the  nation, 
says  (Dent.  iv.  23)  :  "  Take  heed  unto  yourselves, 
lest  ye  forget  the  covenant  of  Jehovah  your  God, 
which  he  made  with  you.  For  Jehovah  your  God 
is  a  consuming  tire,  a  jealous  God."  He  utters 
the  threat  (Lev.  xxvi.  25):  "I  will  bring  the 
sword  upon  you,  that  shall  avenge  the  quarrel  of 
my  covenant."  In  the  book  of  the  prophet  Ezek- 
iel  (ch.  xvii.  15)  we  read:  "  He  hath  broken  the 
covenant,  and  shall  he  be  delivered  >  " 

This  covenant  with  Jehovah,  Abimelech  has 
desecrated  in  the  most  horrible  manner.  Does  he 
fear  no  punishment  for  that  transgression  2  But 
the  natural  man,  who  lightly  breaks  the  covenant 
of  his  God,  nevertheless  claims  the  terrible  right 
of  punishing  those  who  have  failed  in  duty  toward 
himself,  with  a  severity  greater  than  that  threat- 
ened by  God.  The  breach  of  a  covenant  born 
of  blood  and  sin,  is  visited  with  vengeance  like 
a  "  consuming  tire."  Shechem  is  razed  to  the 
ground,  and  salt  is  strewn  over  its  site.  The 
usual  explanation  of  this  proceeding,  of  which  no 
other  instance  occurs,1  is,  that  by  it  Abimelech  in- 
tends  to  declare    Shechem  an   unfruitful  land,  a 

land  of  salt,  as  it  were  (nn?J3).  But  this  expla- 
nation, although  accepted  by  all  recent  expositors, 
does  not  appear  to  be  satisfactory.  For  to  make 
tlie  land  unfruitful,  he  neither  intends,  nor,  if  he 
did,  were  he  able  ;  for  no  one  will  think  of  such  a 
salting  as  would  actually  bring  about  this  result.'2 
He  can  only  intend  to  say,  that  this  city,  being  un- 
faithful to  its  covenants,  and  forgetful  of  its  oaths, 
lias  ceased  to  exist,  and  is  never  more  to  be  known 
as  a  city.  When  Joshua  inflicted  a  similar  de- 
struction on  Jericho,  he  swore  that  it  should  never 
be  rebuilt  (Josh.  vi.  26).  Abimelech  makes  the 
same  declaration  in  the  act  of  strewing  salt;  for 
salt  is  the  symbol  of  an  oath,  just  as  among  all  na- 
tions, not  excepting  the  dull  tribes  of  Siberia,  it 
was  the  symbol  of  covenants.  The  salt  which  he 
strewed  over  Shechem  intimated  both  the  cause 
and  the  perpetuity  of  the  vengeance  inflicted.  A 
fate  still  worse,  but  less  deserved,  was  suffered  by 

1  [In  Scripture,  the  author  means,  of  course.  The  fol- 
lowing instances  in  comparatively  recent  times,  probably 
mere  imitations  of  what  from  this  passage  is  usually  assumed 
to  have  been  an  ancient  custom,  are  noted  by  Wordsworth  : 
"  When  Milan  was  tiken  in  x.  D.  1162,  it  was  sown  with 
lalt  (Sigonius) ;  and  the  house  of  Admiral  Coligny.  mur- 
dered in  the  massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew,  a.  d.  1572,  was. 
r>>  .he  command  of  Charles  IX.,  king  of  France,  sown  with 
sal  . "—  Tk.) 

j  [Wordsworth  docs  however:  "  Sowed  it  with  salt,  to 
OeFtroy  its  fertility,  and  to  make  it  barren  fcr  ever,  like 
Sclotn,  comp.  Pliny,  xxxi.  7."  But  this  idea  is  not  at  all 
ocve-^sar*  to  the  common  explana'ion  (as  given  by  Bertheau, 


the  descendants  of  the  Milesian  Branchidse  who 
had  betrayed  the  treasures  of  the  temple  of  Apollo, 
at  Didymi,  into  the  hands  of  Xerxes,  and  had  ob- 
tained through  him  a  city  in  Persia.  Alexander, 
coming  upon  this  city,  gave  it  up  to  the  vengeance 
of  the  Milesians  in  his  army.  These  destroyed  it 
to  its  very  foundations,  killed  all  the  inhabitants, 
so  that  not  a  trace  of  them  remained,  and  tore  up 
the  groves  by  their  roots,  so  that,  as  Curtius  says 
(vii.  5, 34),  "  vasta  solitudo  et  sterilis  humus  Knquere- 
tur."  Shechem's  destruction  was  not  so  bad  as 
that :  and  it  was  afterwards  rebuilt  (1  Kgs.  xii.  25). 
Vers.  46-49.  And  the  lords  of  the  Tower  of 
Shechem  heard  of  it.  Still  more  cowardly  than 
that  of  the  Shechemites,  is  the  conduct  of  the 
men  of  the  Tower  of  Shechem.  They  venture  no 
resistance  at  all,  but  run  for  safety  to  the  temple- 
asylum  of  El-Berith.  The  House  of  El,  here  men- 
tioned, cannot  well  be  the  same  with  the  House 
of  Baal  hitherto  spoken  of.  The  matter  probably 
stands  thus  :  Under  the  covenant  entered  into  by 
Israel  and  the  heathen,  both  parties  served  the 
Covenant-Deity,  the  Israelites  in  the  temple  of  El- 
Berith,  the  heathen  in  that  of  Baal-Berith.  Aside 
from  this  difference  of  locality,  the  worship  was 
perhaps  identical ;  and  the  covenant  itself  was  al- 
ready a  sin.  It  would  however  be  an  error,  to 
suppose  that  during  such  times  of  apostasy  all  dis- 
tinction between  Israel  and  the  heathen  ceased  to 
exist.  Abimelech  still  continued  to  be  an  Israel- 
ite :  and  the  inhabitants  of  the  Tower  of  Shechem 
probably  expected  to  find  greater  security  in  the 
House  of  El-Berith  than  could  be  looked  for  in 
the  asylum  of  a  wholly  heathen  temple.  The  place 

to  which  they  retired,  is  called  n,_]~!  and  is  prob- 
ably a  hall  of  the  temple3  (like  ^5>;^>  ustJ  to 
tlenote  a  special  part  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem). 
The  sanctuary  privileges  of  temples  were  very 
great  among  all  nations  ;  and,  as  is  well  known 
with  reference  to  the  temple  at  Ephesus,  were  not 
seldom  misused.  In  order  to  destroy  Pausaniaa 
without  violating  the  rights  of  sanctuary,  the  doors 
of  the  temple  of  Minerva,  at  Sparta,  in  which  he  had 
taken  refuge,  were  built  up,  and  the  roof  taken  off 
"  that  under  the  open  sky  he  might  more  quickly 
perish  "  (Corn.  Xepos,  Paus-  ch.  5).  Abimelech  re- 
sorted to  more  terrible  means.  He  ascended  the 
neighboring  wooded  hill,  Mount  Zalmon — so  named 
from  its  forest-shades,  —  and  hewed  off  a  multitude 
of  boughs,  himself  being  the  first  to  swing  the  axe. 

(The  plural,  niCT^,  stands  for  all  the  axes  that 

were  used.)  These  boughs  were  piled  up  about 
the  building,  and  all  its  inmates  perished  in  the 
flames.  A  like  deed  is  related  by  Herodotus  (iv. 
164)  of  Arcesilaus  :  a  number  of  Cyrenieans  hav- 
ing taken  refuge  in  a  tower,  he  heaped  wood 
around  it,  and  burned  them  to  death.  It  is  a 
species  of  violence  which,  especially  among  the 
northern  nations,  has  been  practiced  oftener  than 

Keil,  Bush)  that  the  act  was  designed  symbolically  to  turn 
the  city  into  a  sait-desert.  Our  author's  explanation  does 
not  conflict  with  that  of  his  predecessors,  but  rather  com- 
pletes it.  —  Te.] 

3  The  extent  of  the  temple  building  which  this  implies 
is  not  unparalleled.  The  temple  of  Diana  in  Samos  wai 
so  large  as  to  afford  sanctuary  to  the  300  Coreyraean  boyi 
whom  Periander  dispatched  to  Alyathes.  king  of  L}dia.  for 
eunuchs,  and  yet  leave  room  for  choirs  of  Samian  youth  M 
execute  certain  religious  dances  before  them,  ingeniously 
invented  as  a  means  of  conveying  food  to  them  (Herod,  iii 
48). 


CHAPTER   IX.  42-57. 


156 


jnce, —  as,  for  instance,  by  king  Olaf  (Tryggves- 
son),  who  burned  in  this  manner  all  the  warlocks 
of  his  land  (Snorro,  Heimgskringla,  Saga  vi.  ch.  69). 

In  connection  with  these  events,  a  number  of 
topographical  references  to  the  region  of  Shechem, 
which  prove  that  the  narrator  was  an  eye-witness, 
but  which  although  alluding  to  permanent  land- 
marks, as  mountain,  valley,  and  forest,  are  yet  not 
easily  traced.  Migdal  (Tower  of)  Shechem,  how- 
ever, may  be  confidently  assumed  to  be  the  same 
as  Beth  (House  of)  Millo  (vers.  6,  20).  Abime- 
lech's  wrath  against  it  is  thus  readily  understood  ; 
for  its  inhabitants  had  taken  part  in  his  election 
at  the  Monument-Oak,  and  had  now  doubtless 
made  common  cause  with  those  of  Lower  Shechem. 
For  it  is  perhaps  safe  to  assume  that  the  places 
were  related  to  each  other  as  Upper  and  Lower 
Shechem.  Migdal  Shechem,  as  the  Acropolis,  was 
a  little  city  by  itself,  and  might  have  ventured  on 
further  resistance ;  but  its  people  preferred  to  pray 
for  mercy,  which  Abimelech  was  not  the  man  to 
exercise. 

Vers.  50-5-3.  And  Abimelech  -went  to  Thebez. 
Since  the  course  of  the  narrative  leads  to  the  in- 
ference that  Abimelech's  march  upon  this  city 
formed  part  of  his  vengeance  on  Shechem,  its  lo- 
cation must  be  sought  for  at  a  very  short  distance 
from  that  place.  The  opinion  of  recent  expositors 
and  travellers  (Robinson,  Berggren,  cf.  Hitter,  xv. 
44S  [Gage's  Transl.  ii.  341]),  who  identify  Thebez 
with  the  modern  Tubas  at  the  head  of  Wady  el- 
Malih,  does  not  therefore  appear  to  be  altogether 
certain.  To  me,  Tubas  has  appeared  more  suit- 
able for  Tabbath  (ch.  vii.  22).  Thebez  must  have 
been  closely  connected  with  Shechem.  Since,  in 
accordance  with  Jotham's  parable,  the  two  miser- 
able associates,  Abimelech  and  Shechem.  perish  by 
each  other,  and  since  Abimelech  finds  his  end  at 
Thebez,  the  inhabitants  of  the  latter  must  have 
been  among  those  who  at  first  patronized  Abime- 
lech. Thebez  was  built  in  circular  form,  like  the 
Grecian  Thebaj,  for  it  had  its  Tower  in  the  centre. 
Its  inhabitants  preferred  desperate  battle  to  mercy ; 
but  they  were  already  on  the  verge  of  destruction, 
when  Abimelech  {"inter  confertissimos  violentissime 
dimiccms,"  righting  furiously  in  the  thickest  of  the 
crowd,  as  Justin  says  of  Pyrrhus)  was  struck  on 
the  head  by  a  mill-stone,  which  crushed  his  skull. 
It  appears  that  the  inhabitants  of  Thebez  were 
prepared  for  a  lengthy  siege,  since  along  with  pro- 
visions they  had  also  brought  a  hand-mil]  into  the 
tower.     Such  a  mill  consisted  of  a  movable  upper 

(23~!>  wagon,  Eng.  runner,  Germ.  Laufer),  and 
of  an  immovable,  nether  stone  (i"l\Pinri  PH5), 
on  which  the  other  turned.  The  duty  of  grinding 
generally  devolved  on  women.  Abimelech  falls, 
as  the  Jewish  expositors  say,  by  a  stone,  as  on  a 
etone  he  had  murdered  his  brothers.  Other  usurp- 
er^ also  have  met  with  the  same  fate.  When  in 
1190,  impious  men  sought  to  destroy  the  poor 
Jews,  who  had  taken  refuge  in  the  royal  castle  at 
York,  one  of  the  ringleaders  of  the  mob  fell, 
crushed  by  a  stone  (Milman,  Hist,  of  the  Jews,  iii. 
242). 

Ver.  54.  That  men  say  not,  A  woman  slew 
him.  Poof  Abimelech,  in  the  moment  of  his  fall, 
thinks  of  nothing  save  that  his  death  will  be 
iscribed   to  a  woman ;  an   end  which  has  at   all 

imes  be»n  considered  inglorious.  To  his  latest 
oreath,  men  were  to  be  deceived  by  appearances. 

for  though  his  attendant  gave  him  the  finishing 
stroke,  it  was  nevertheless  the  woman  that  killed 
him.     And,  as  2  Sam.  xi.  21  shows,  he  was  not 


able  to  avert  the  dreaded  infamy.  Still,  this  utter- 
ance also  goes  to  show  the  warlike  spirit  of  the 
fallen  man.  Energy,  valor,  and  iron  strength 
were  inherited  characteristics  of  the  son,  not  un 
worthy  of  his  heroic  father.  He  towers,  at  all 
events,  far  above  the  cowardly  Shechemites,  the 
braggart  Gaal,  and  the  intriguing  Zebul.  If  am- 
bition and  unrestrained  fury  had  not  stupefied  his 
conscience;  if,  like  Gideon,  he  had  learned  to  serve 
and  to  suffer;  had  faithfully  tarried  the  call  of  his 
God,  and  had  not  sought  to  found  by  the  sword 
what  only  God's  Spirit  can  establish,  it  might  have 
been  said  of  him,  as  of  the  noblest :  "he  judged, 
delivered  his  people."  As  it  was,  he  is  never  even 
named  by  the  title  "  King  "  which  he  arrogated  to 
himself;  and  Jewish  tradition  exalts  the  heathen 
king  Abimelech  of  Abraham's  time,  above  the 
valiant  son  of  Gideon. 

Vers.  55-57.  "When  the  men  of  Israel  saw 
that  Abimelech  was  dead.  In  Abimelech's 
death,  also,  we  may  read  the  fate  of  tyrants.  Hij 
attendant  thrusts  him  through  without  hesitation, 
and  the  dead  chieftain  is  forsaken  by  all.  The 
interest  created  by  his  person  and  his  wages,  is 
gone.  How  much  more  beautiful  is  the  otherwise 
so  tragical  death  of  Saul !  His  attendant,  influ- 
enced by  reverence,  refuses  to  kill  him,  and  finally 
follows  him  in  voluntary  death.  The  songs  of 
David  celebrate  his  memory  :  Abimelech's  enitaph 
is  his  brother  Jotham's  curse ! 


HOMII.ETICAL  AND    PRACTICAL. 

Compare  on  p.  147. 

[Bp.  Hall:  0  the  just  successions  of  the  re- 
venges of  God !  Gideon's  ephod  is  punished  with 
the  blood  of  his  sons  ;  the  blood  of  his  sons  is  shed 
by  the  procurement  of  the  Shechemites  ;  the  blood 
of  the  Shechemites  is  shed  by  Abimelech ;  the 
blood  of  Abimelech  is  spilt  by  a  woman.  The  re- 
taliations of  God  are  sure  and  just. —  The  same  : 
The  pursued  Shechemites  fly  to  the  house  of  their 
god  Berith :  now  they  are  safe ;  that  place  is  at 
once  a  fort  and  a  sanctuary.  Whither  should  we 
fly  in  our  distress,  but  to  our  God  ?  And  now  this 
refuge  shall  teach  them  what  a  god  they  have 
served.  —  The  same  :  Now,  according  to  the 
prophecy  of  Jotham,  a  fire  goes  out  of  the  bram- 
ble, and  consumes  these  cedars,  and  their  eternal 
flames  begin  in  the  house  of  their  Berith.  The 
confusion  of  wicked  men  rises  out  of  the  false 
deities  which  they  have  doted  on.  —  Henky 
What  inventions  men  have  to  destroy  one  an 
other!  —  The  same:  About  1,000  men  and 
women  perished  in  these  flames,  many  of  whom, 
probably,  were  no  way  concerned  in  the  quarrel, 
nor  meddled  with  either  side  ;  men  of  factious  tur- 
bulent spirits,  perish  not  alone  in  their  iniquity, 
but  involve  many  more,  that  follow  them  in  their 
simplicity,  in  the  same  calamity  with  them.  — 
Wordsworth  :  Many  powerful  enemies  of  God 
and  of  his  people,  afte'r  victorious  acts  of  oppres- 
sion, have  been  overthrown  at  last  by  weak  instru- 
ments, even  bv  women  :  Sisera,  by  DeNjrah  and 
Jael;  Haman,  by  Esther ;  Holofernes,  b)  Tudith; 
and  the  Church," by  the  power  of  the  Seed,  over- 
comes the  world.  —  Bush  :  The  end  of  Abimelech 
suggests  the  remark,  1.  That  they  who  thirst  for 
blood,  God  will  at  last  give  them  their  own  blood  to 
drink.  2.  The  weak,  in  God's  hand,  can  confound 
the  mightv  ;  and  those  who  walk  in  pride.  He  is 
able  to  abase.  3.  They  who  in  life  consulted  only 
their  pride  and  ambition,  will  usually  die  as  the) 


156 


THE     500K   OF  JUDGES. 


lived,  more  solicitous  that  their  honor  should  be 
preserved  on  earth,  than  that  their  souls  be  saved 
from  hell.    (4.)  The  methods  proud  men  take  to  se- 


cure a  great  name,  often  only  serve  to  perpetuatt 
their  infamy.  —  Taj 


SIXTH  SECTION. 

TWO  JUDGES   IN  QUIET,  PEACEFUL  TIMES  !  TOLA  OF  ISSACHAB  AND  JAIB  TEE   OILEADITE. 


The  Judgeships  of  Tola  and  Jair. 
Chapter    X.    1-5. 

1  And  after  Abimelech  there  arose  to  defend  [deliver]  Israel,  Tola  the  son  of  Puah, 
the  son  of  Dodo,  a  man  of  Issachar ;  and  he  dwelt  in  Shamir  in  mount  Ephraim. 

2  And  he  judged  Israel  twenty  and  three  years,  and  died,  and  was  buried  in   Shamir. 

3  And  after  him  arose  Jair,  a  [the]  Gileadite,  and  judged  Israel  twenty  and  two  years. 

4  And  he  had  thirty  sons  [,]  that  rode  on  thirty  ass   colts,  and  they  had  thirty  cities, 
[those]  which  are  called  Havoth-jair  [the  circles  of  Jair]  unto  this  day,  which   are  in 

5  the  land  of  Gilead.     And  Jair  died,  and  was  buried  in  Camon. 


Jerubbaal  ? "  The  names  Tola  and  Puah,  as 
borne  by  sons  of  Issachar,  are  already  found  in 
Gen.  xlvi.  13.  They  became  established  in  the 
families  of  that  tribe,  and  frequently  recur.  It  was 
just  so  in  German  families,  especially  of  the  Middle 
Ages.  Particular  names  were  peculiar  to  particu- 
lar families.  (Instead  of  HS'lS,  Puah,  we  have 
H^f,  Puvah,  in  Gen.  xlvi.  13  and  Num.  xxvi.  23, 

though  not  in  all  MSS.  1  Chr.  vii.  1  has  HhWS, 
Puah.)  These  names  indicate  a  certain  industry, 
which,  it  may  be  inferred,  must  have  been  carried 

on  in  Issachar.  Tola  (3771FI)  is  the  Kermes- 
worm  (coccus  ilicis),  from  which  the  crimson,  or 
deep  scarlet  color  (^tS  nS^l-l),  of  which  we 
read  so  much  in  connection  with  the  tabernacle, 
was  derived  ;  and  Puah  is  Chaldee  for  rubia  tincto- 
rum,  or  madder  red  (cf.  Buxtortf",  sub  voce).  We 
shall  not  err,  perhaps,  if  we  conjecture  that  the 
third  name  also  is  added  because  of  its  agree- 
ment in  meaning  with  the  two  preceding.      For 

Dodo,  if  we  derive  it  from  "PfTj   dud,    instead  of 

"Vn,  dod,  cousin,  means  "pot,"  or  "vessel,"  a 
prominent  utensil  in  the  preparation  of  dyes.1 
Names  of  this  kind,  it  is  well  known,  are  not  un- 
frequent  in  the  East.  Hammer  (Namen  der  Amber) 
even  adduces  the  name  Fihr,  which  signifies  the 
stone  used  for  grinding  perfumes. 

He  dwelt  in  Shamir,  on  Mount  Ephraim.  The 
centre  of  his  judicial  activity  was  permanently 
fixed  in  Ephraim.  As  to  Shamir,  this  name  (on 
its  import,  compare  my  treatise  Schtimir,  Erf. 
1856)  may  be  identified  with  Shemer,  name  of  the 
owner  of  the  hill  on  which  king  Omri  afterwards 
built  Shomeron,  Samaria  (1  Kgs.  xvi.  24). 

Vers.  3-5.     And   after   him   arose   Jair,   the 

1    On    the   vessels  excavated    in    the   sandstone,    which    Wilde,   Voyage  in  the  Mediterranean,  Dublin,  1840,  ii  ]  48  ff 
»ere  used  in  **]e  preparation  of  the  purple  dye  at  Tyre,  see    quoted  by  Ritter,  xvii.  372. 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  1.  And  after  Abimelech  there  arose 
Tola,  the  son  of  Puah,  the  son  of  Dodo.     The 

record  of  this  man's  life  contains  no  stirring  ac- 
tions, like  those  of  Abimelech,  but  tells  of  some- 
thing better.  He  "delivered"  and  "judged" 
Israel.  This,  however,  always  presupposes  re- 
newed consciousness  of  sin  on  the  part  of  Israel, 
and  return  to  the  living  God.  It  is  probable  that 
the  horrible  deeds  and  the  terrible  end  of  Abime- 
lech and  Shechem  made  such  an  impression  upon 
the  conscience  of  Israel,  as  to  open  the  way  for  de- 
liverance. Under  this  view,  the  words  "  after  Abime- 
lech "  receive  a  deeper  significance  ;  and  the  rea- 
son why  the  history  of  that  personage  was  so  copi- 
ously narrated  becomes  still  more  evident.  That 
which  at  other  times  was  the  result  of  terrors  from 
without,  is  this  time  brought  abi  ut  by  the  civil 
catastrophe  within. 

The  deliverer's  name  was  "  Tola  the  son  of 
Puah,  the  son  of  Dodo."  The  mention  of  father 
and  grandfather  both,  is  unusual,  and  occurs  in 
the  case  of  no  other  Judge.  It  was  therefore  nat- 
ural, that  already  at  an  early  date,  and  also,  it 
would  seem,  by  the  Masora,  "  ben  Dodo "  was 
taken  appellatively,  as  meaning  "  Son  of  his  Un- 
cle or  Cousin."  The  "  his"  in  that  case  must  re- 
fer to  Abimelech  ;  and  Tola  would  have  to  be  re- 
garded as  the  son  of  a  brother  or  a  sister  of  Gideon. 
The  son  of  Gideon's  brother,  he  cannot  have  been 
(although  this  is  just  the  relation  indicated  by  an- 
cient expositions,  cf.  Xhe-jrarpadeAtpovot'  the  LXX.); 
for  he  belonged  not  to  Manasseh,  but  to  Issachar. 
If  ;i  >i*ter  of  Gideon  had  married  a  man  of  the 
tribe  of  Issachar,  this  person  might  indeed  have 
be<*n  eallrd  an  uncle  (dod)  of  Abimelech.  But  if 
such  were  the  relation,  is  it  not  more  likely  that 
the  writer  would  have  said,  "  Son  of  the  sister  of 


CHAPTER  X.   1-5. 


157 


tfileadite.  Just  as  Tola  was  a  family-name  in 
[s&ofhar,  so  was  Jair  in  Gilead.  The  ancestor  of 
this  Jair  was  the  son  of  Manasseh,  whose  name 
was  associated  with  the  acquisition  of  the  greatest 
part  of  the  territory  in  possession  of  the  eastern 
half-tribe  of  Manasseh.  Machir,  it  is  stated,  Num. 
x.xxii.  39-41 ,  took  Gilead,  and  "  Jair,  son  of  Manas- 
aeh,"  the  "  circles,"  which  were  afterwards  called  the 
' '  circles  of  Jair."  It  has  already  been  pointed  out  in 
connection  with  our  explanation  of  the  name  Hiv- 
ite  (Chivi),  that  chavah,  (plur.  chavoth,  Eng.  Ver. 
Havoth),  means  "circle,"  from  the  form  in  which 
those  villages  to  which  it  is  applied  were  laid  out 
(see  on  ch.  iii.  3).  It  would,  therefore,  involve  a 
twofold  error  to  explain  Havoth-Jair,  as  modern 
expositors  do,  by  making  it  analogous  to  such  Ger- 
man names  &3  Eisleben  and  Aschersleben ;  for,  in 
the  first  place,  chavah  does  not  mean  "  life  "  here ; 
and,  secondly,  in  such  names  as  the  above,  the 
German  teben  does  not  mean  vita  but  mansio. 

By  these  "circles  of  Jair"  we  are  evidently  to 
understand  the  whole  of  the  present  western  Hau- 
ran,  reaching  as  far  as  Jebel  Hauran,  for  Kenath 
(the  present  Kenawath)  is  reckoned  among  the 
sixty  cities  of  Jair  (1  Chr.  ii.  23  ;  1  Kgs.  iv.  13). 
Wetzstein's  conjecture  [Hauran,  p.  101),  that  these 
cities  are  only  sixty  tent-villages  of  the  nomadic 
order,  is  by  no  means  to  be  accepted ;  for  the  books 
of  Kings  and  Chronicles  are  conversant  with  great 
cities,  with  walls  and  brazen  bars,  in  the  region 
that  "  pertained  to  Jair."  The  objection  that  if 
such  cities  had  existed,  the  Assyrians  could  not 
have  subjected  the  two  and  a  half  tribes  so  readily,  is 
not  borne  out.  In  the  first  place,  because  the  ac- 
counts of  this  conquest  are  very  brief  and  scanty  ; 
and  in  the  second  place,  because  the  history  of  all 
ages  teaches  us,  that  when  the  Spirit  has  left  a  peo- 
ple, neither  fortresses  nor  "  steep  heights  "  avail  to 
detain  the  enemy.  At  all  events,  the  Assyrian  suc- 
cesses do  not  prove  that  the  architectural  remains 
of  the  Hauran  cannot  in  their  elements  be  referred 
back  to  the  time  of  the  Amorites  and  Israelites. 
Without  at  present  entering  into  any  discussion  of 
this  subject,  we  hold  the  contrary  to  be  highly 
probable,  even  though,  at  the  places  which  would 
here  come  into  consideration,  more  recent  build- 
ings bear  the  stamp  of  more  recent  times.  Indeed, 
it  seems  to  me,  that  just  as  it  was  possible  to  iden- 
tify Kenath,  Salcan,  Golan,  etc.,  so  the  name 
Jair  also  is  in  existence  to  this  day.  I  find  it  in 
the  name  of  the  city  called  "  Aere  "  by  Burckhardt, 
"Eera"  by  Seetzen,  and  "  Ire  "  by  Wetzstein.  It 
is  still  the  seat  of  an  influential  (l)ruse)  chieftain. 
Ritter  (xv.  944)  warns  us  against  confounding  it 
with  the  Aera  which  the  Itinerary  of  Antonine 
puts  in  the  place  of  the  present  Szanamein  ;  but  it 
were  more  proper  to  say  that  the  repeated  occur- 
rence of  the  name,  should  be  regarded  as  evidence 
that  the  whole  region  was  once  called  "  Jair's  cir- 
cles." 

The  narrator's  remark  that  the  cities  of  Jair  "  are 
called  Havoth  Jair  unto  this  day,"  has  been  sup- 
posed to  conflict  with  the  statement  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, wherein  this  name  is  derived  from  the  first 
Jair  (cf.  Hengst.,  Pent.  ii.  193).  With  regard  to 
some  other  names  of  places,  such  an  exchange  of 


1  fin  the  text,  Dr.  Ca9sel  renders 


anb 


by  "  those,'1 


rhile  here  he  writes  "  of  those."  The  first  rendering  may 
oe  defended,  but  the  second  is  as  doubtful  as  it  is  unneces- 
sary. If  the  intention  be  to  avoid  ail  appearance  of  con- 
Jict  with  the  Pentateuch,  this  is  just  as  effectually  reached 
by  the  unimpeachable  version  of  De  Wette :  Man  nennet 
Ur  Jait't  Diijfej  />.■.«.  nuf  diften   Tag —  they  are  called  Jair's 


one  derivation  for  another,  may  perhaps  be  made 
out ;  but  here  it  is  quite  impossible  that  one  should 
have  taken  place.  The  narrator,  who  keeps  the 
Pentateuch  constantly  before  his  eyes,  designs  only 
to  remind  the  reader  of  what  was  there  stated.  In 
themselves,  his  words  would  have  been  entirely  in- 
sufficient to  explain  the  origin  of  the  designation 
Havoth-Jair,  seeing  the  discourse  was  about "  cities  " 

(Ov7^?).  Moreover,  the  number  of  these  cities, 
at  a  later  date,  was  reckoned  at  sixty,  whereas 
here  mention  is  made  of  only  thirty.    The  sentence 

is  indeed  peculiar  on  account  of  the  double  CH7; 
for  which  reason  a  few  codices  read  it  but  once. 
But  the  word  does  not  bear  the  same  sense  in  both 

cases.  The  second  CH7,  introduces  an  explana- 
tory clause ;  so  that  the  meaning  of  the  sentence  is 
this :  "  thirty  cities  belonged  to  them  (3(7^'  °J 
those  (Crib) 1  which  (the  relative  "ItTN  is  fre- 
quently omitted)  are  called  Havoth-Jair  unto  this 
day."  The  closing  words  of  this  sentence  ("unto 
this  day")  are  evidently  a  mere  verbal  citation 
from  Deut.  iii.  14 ;  for  no  other  occasion  exists 
here,  where  the  question  is  only  of  Jair's  distin- 
guished position,  for  their  use.  Jair,  by  his 
strength  and  virtue,  had  diffused  his  family  over 
one  half  of  the  entire  district,  with  which  his  an 
cient  progenitor  had  long  ago  associated  his  own 
name. 

And  he  had  thirty  sons,  who  rode  on  thirty 
asses,  and  had  thirty  cities.     The  paronomasia 

between  n"HJ37,  asses,  and  the  rare  form  C'TJV. 
for  "  cities,"  authorizes  the  conjecture  that  we  have 
here  a  sentence  from  a  song  of  praise  in  honor  of 
Jair  and  his  prosperous  fortune.  That  which  is 
celebrated  is,  not  that  he  possessed  thirty  asses  — 
what  would  that  be  to  a  man  who  had  thirty 
cities  ?  —  but  that  he  was  the  father  of  thirty 
sons,  all  of  whom  enjoyed  the  honor  and  distinc- 
tion implied  in  the  statement  that  they  rode  upon 
asses.  They  rode,  that  is  to  say,  not  merely  as 
men  of  quality —  the  usual  explanation,  —  but  as 
chiefs,  governors,  and  judges.  It  was  peculiar  to 
such  persons  especially  that  they  made  use  of  the 
ass,  as  the  animal  of  peace.  Their  very  appear- 
ance on  this  animal,  was  expressive  of  their  calling 
to  reconcile  and  pacify.  The  sons  of  Jairs  judged 
their  thirty  cities.  This  is  something  not  given  to 
all  rich  fathers ;  it  was  a  happiness  which  not 
even  Samuel  the  Priest  was  destined  to  enjoy. 

Jair  was  buried  in  Camon,  doubtless  one  of  the 
thirty  cities  of  Hauran.  The  farther  and  more 
thorough  investigation  is  carried  in  the  country- 
east  of  the  Jordan,  the  more  instructive  will  its  re- 
sults become.  Perhaps  we  may  take  the  Sahwed 
el-Kamh,  on  Wetzstein's  map,  not  far  from  Ire 
(Jair),  for  the  Camon  of  the  text.  However  little 
may  be  told  of  many  of  the  Judges  of  Israel,  of 
their  place  of  burial  information  is  given.  The 
whole  land  was  to  be,  as  it  were,  a,  memorial  hall, 
by  which  the  people  are  reminded  of  the  men  whc 
brought  help  in  distress,  when  they  repented,  and 
which  may  also  teach  them  to  know  that  all  men, 

Villages  unto  this  day.     -lS~ip^    is  the  indeterminate  3d 

per.  plural,  and  (as  is  remarked  by  Bertheau  and  Keil}  doee 

not  at  all  affirm  that  the  name  was  now  first  given.  CH; 

is  the  dative  of  that  to  which  the  name  is  given,  and  stand* 
first  for  the  sake  of  emphasis  ;  "  they  had  thirty  cities 
precisely  those  cities  people  call  Havath-Jair."  —  Ttt.J 


156 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


however  valiant,  die,  and  that  only  the  one,  eter- 
nal God  survives  in  deathless  existence.  But  how 
inadequate  monuments  and  sepulchres  are  to 
preserve  energy  and  piety  among  the  people,  that 
the  following  section  once  more  teaches. 


HOM1LETICAL   AND    PRACTICAL. 

Two  judges  in  times  of  quiet.  After  the  terrible 
storm,  comes  a  calm.  For  half  a  century  Tola  and 
Jair  judge  Israel,  without  committing  frightful 
wrongs,  or  performing  enviable  deeds.  The  great- 
ness of  Gideon's  times,  and  the  baseness  of  Abime- 
lech's,  are  both  exhausted.  An  unknown,  but 
happy,  generation  lives  and  works  in  peace  under 
pious  Judges.  No  enemy  threatens,  the  word  of 
God  is  quick  and  active,  the  country  prospers, 
commerce  flourishes.  A  quiet  life  is  rich  in  seeds. 
Amid  the  silence  of  repose,  the  germs  of  spring 
prepare  themselves.  It  is  a  type  of  the  Kingdom 
in  the  future,  when  through  the  eternal  calm  only 
the  anthems  of  adoring  choirs  will  be  heard,  like 
the  voices  of  nightingales  resounding  through  the 
night. 


So,  it  is  not  given  to  every  one  to  live  a  quiet 
peaceful  life,  undisturbed  by  political  and  social 
alarms.  Let  him  who  enjoys  it,  not  envy  the 
fame  with  which  publicity  surrounds  great  names. 
In  quietness  and  confidence  shall  be  your  strength 
says  the  prophet  (Isa.  xxx.  15). 

Starke  :  To  govern  a  nation  well  in  times  of 
peace,  is  not  less  praiseworthy  than  to  carry  on 
wars  and  overcome  enemies.  —  Lisco  :  Tola 
saved  his  people,  not  indeed  by  wars  and  victims, 
but  by  right  and  justice,  by  the  concord  and  peace 
which  he  restored  in  Israel. 

[Scott  :  The  removal  of  hardened  sinners,  by 
a  righteous  God,  often  makes  way  for  reformation 
and  public  tranquillity,  and  proves  a  great  mercy 
to  those  who  survive.  —  Wordsworth:  The 
time  in  which  they  |Y.  e.  Tola,  Jair,  Ibzan,  Elon, 
and  Abdon]  judged  Israel  amounted  to  seventy 
years,  but  the  Holy  Spirit  does  not  record  a  single 
act  done  by  any  one  of  them  ;  and  thus  He  leads 
us  to  look  forward  and  upward  to  another  life,  and 
to  that  heavenly  chronicle  which  is  written  with 
indelible  characters  in  the  memory  of  God  Him- 
self, and  is  ever  open  to  his  divine  eye.  —  Ta.] 


SEVENTH    SECTION. 


THE   OPPRESSION   OP   THE    MIDIAKITES.     JEPHTHAH,    THE   JUDQB    OP    THE   TOW. 


Renewed  apostasy  and  punishment.     Awakening  and  repentance. 
Chapter    X.    6-16. 


6  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  did  evil  again  [continued  to  do  evil]  in  the  sight 
of  the  Lord  [JehovahJ,  and  served  [the]  Baalim,  and  [the]  Ashtaroth,  and  the  gods 
of  Syria  [Aram],  and  the  gods  of  Zidon,  and  the  gods  of  Moab,  and  the  gods  of 
the  children   [sons]  of  Amnion,  and  the  gods  of  the   Philistines,  and   forsook  the 

7  Lord  [Jehovah],  and  served  not  Him.  And  the  anger  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  was 
hot  [kindled]  against  Israel,  and  he  sold  [delivered]  them  into  the  hands  of  the  Phil- 

8  istines,  and  into  the  hands  of  the  children  [sons]  of  Ammon.  And  that  year  they 
vexed  and  oppressed  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  eighteen  years,1  all  the  chil- 
dren  of  Israel  that  were   on  the  other  side  Jordan  in  the  land  of  the  Amorites, 

9  which  is  in  Gilead.  Moreover,  the  children  [sons]  of  Ammon  passed  over  [the] 
Jordan,  to  fight  also  against  Judah,  and  against  Benjamin,  and  against  the  house 

10  of  Ephraim  :  so  that  Israel  was  sore  distressed.'2  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel 
cried  unto  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  saying,  We  have  sinned  against  thee,  both  [namely], 
because  we  have  forsaken  our  God,  and  also  [omit :  also  ;  read  :  have]  served  [the] 

11  Baalim.  And  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  said  unto  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel,  Did  not 
/  deliver  you  from  the  Egyptians  [from  Mizraim.  i.  e.  Egypt],  and  from  the  Amorites, 

12  from  the  children  [sons]  of  Ammon,  and  from  the  Philistines?8  The  Zidonians 
also  [And  when  the  Sidonians],  and  the  Amalekites,  and  the  Maonites  did   oppress 

13  you  ;  [,]  and  ye  cried  to  me,  and  [then]  I  delivered  you  out  of  their  hand.  Yet  ye 
have  forsaken  me,  and  served   other  gods  :  wherefore  I  will  deliver  you  no    more 

14  Go  and  cry  unto  the  gods  which  ye  have  chosen  ;   let  them  deliver  you  in  the  time 

15  of  your  tribulation  [distress].  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  said  unto  the  Lord 
[Jehovah],  We  have  sirned :  do  thou  unto  us  whatsoever  seemeth  good  unto  thef  ; 


CHAPTER   X.   6-16. 


159 


I C  deliver  us  only,  we  pray  thee,  this  day.  And  they  put  away  the  strange  gods  from 
among  them,  and  served  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  :  and  his  soul  was  grieved  for  fen 
dured  no  longer]  the  misery  of  Israel. 

TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 
[I  Ver.  8.  — Dr.  Cassel  translates  this  clause  as  follows  (reading  r"T3*?J3,  instead   of    n^^S,  see  the  Continental? 

T    T    -  '  T     T     -   ' 

below) :  rf  And  they  vexed  and  plagued  the  sons  of  Israel,  as  this  y«ar,  eighteen  years  long,"  etc.     The  better  way  is  to 
repeat  the  idea  of  the  verbs  after"  eighteen  years,"  thus  :    ft  And  they  broke  and  crushed  the  sons  of  Israel   in  that 
year;  eighteen  years  did  they  oppress  all  the  sons  of  Israel  who  were  beyond  the  Jordan,"  etc.      VV^  and    t^H 
couie  from  the  same  root,  and  are  synonyms  used  to  strengthen  the  idea.  —  Te.] 

[2  Ver.  9.  —  Literally :  "  and  it  became  exceedingly  strait  to  Israel,"  cf.  ch.  ii.  15.     On  the  use  of  the  fern,  gender 
(H^PH,  from    "H^l     in  impersonal  constructions,  see  Green,  Gram.,  243,  3. —  TR-] 

[3  Ver.  11.  —  For  Dr.  Cassel's  rendering  of  this  verse,  see  the  comments  on  it.     The  sentence  is  anacoluthic  in  the 
original  ;  the  construction  being  changed  at  the  beginning  of  the  next  verse.  —  Tb.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  6.  Ajid  the  sons  of  Israel  continued  to 
do  the  evil  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah.  Sin  and 
forgiveness  are  the  hinges  of  all  history,  especially 
of  the  history  of  Israel,  including  in  that  term  the 
spiritual  Israel  of  modern  times.  They  follow 
each  other  like  night  and  morning.  As  soon  as 
the  prayers  and  faith  of  a  great  man  cease  from 
among  the  people,  and  the  earth  is  heaped  over 
his  grave,  the  new  generation  breaks  loose,  like  an 
unrestrained  youth.  After  Jair's  death,  idolatry 
spreads  far  and  wide.  Israel  plays  the  harlot,  in 
the  east  with  Aram,  in  the  west  with  the  Phoeni- 
cians, in  the  southeast  with  Moab  and  Amnion,  in 
the  southwest  with  the  Philistines.  Those  gods 
are  named  first,  whose  people  have  already  op- 
pressed Israel,  and  have  been  turned  back  by  men 
of  God.  First,  the  Baalim  and  Ashtaroth,  whose 
service  Gideon  especially,  the  Jerubbaal,  overthrew 
(eh.  vi.  25) ;  next,  the  gods  of  Aram,  whose  king 
was  defeated  by  the  hero  Othniel ;  then,  the  gods 
of  Zidon,  the  mention  of  whom  —  since  Zidon,  the 
metropolis,  stood  for  all  Phoenicia,  i,  e.  Canaan  — 
reminds  us  of  the  victory  of  Deborah  and  Barak 
over  Jabin,  king  of  Canaan  ;  and  finally,  the  gods 
of  Moab,  smitten  by  Ehud.  Israel  served  these 
gods,  although  they  were  unable  to  stand  before 
the  eternal  God.  And  beside  these,  it  now  also 
serves  the  gods  of  the  Ammonites  and  Philistines. 
These  also  will  first  cause  it  to  experience  oppres- 
sion ;  but  then,  though  only  after  long  penance, 
become  the  occasion  of  divine  displays  of  grace 
and  mercy  to  Israel.  In  truth,  this  "  young  "  Israel 
serves  all  gods,  except  only  the  living  and  the  true. 
It  runs  after  every  superstition,  every  delusion, 
tve^y  sensual  gratification,  every  self-deception,  but 
forgets  the  truth  and  peace  of  God.  It  seeks  false 
friends,  and  forsakes  the  true. 

Vers.  7-10.  And  He  delivered  them  into  the 
hand  of  the  Philistines,  and  into  the  hand  of 
the  sons  of  Amnion.  As  far  as  their  sufferings 
and  conflicts  with  the  western  nations  are  con- 
cerned, these  are  related  subsequently  under  the  his- 
tory of  Samson.  The  chastisement  which  they  ex- 
perience by  means  of  Amnion,  leads  the  way.  This 
falls  especially  upon  the  people  east  of  the  "Jordan, 
the  neighbors  of  Ammon ;  and  the  enervating  and 

1  [On   this  translation,  see  note  1  under   (t  Textual  and 

3rammatieal."  Dr.  Cassel  evidently  takes  S^nPT    H^tt1 

■   t  ■*  T 

( this  vear,"  to  mean  the  first  year  of  the  oppression.     0th- 


weakening  effects  of  sin  and  unbelief  become  clearly 
manifest  in  the  fact  that  one  of  the  most  valiant 
of  the  Israelitish  tribes,  Gilead,  the  home,  as  it 
were,  of  heroes,  is  not  able  successfully  to  oppose 
the  enemy.  Israel  is  pressed,  plagued,  plundered  ; 
"  as  in  the  first  year,1  so  through  eighteen  years  " 

(for  n3Q?a  read  J"T31|>3).  The  inflictions  to 
which  they  were  obliged  to  submit  one  year,  the 
spoliation  of  their  harvests,  the  plundering  of  their 
villages,  the  imposition  of  tribute,  are  repeated 
year  after  year,  eighteen  times.  The  manifest 
weakness  of  Israel,  the  dismemberment  of  the  na- 
tion, so  that  one  tribe  finds  no  help  from  any  other 
(ch.  xii.  2),  emboldens  the  oppressor.  Ammon 
passes  over  the  Jordan,  and  attacks  Israel  in  the 
heart  of  its  most  powerful  tribes,  without  meeting 
resistance.  But  how  came  Israel  into  such  a  con- 
dition of  disruption  ?  Whence  this  inability  to 
unite  its  forces  against  the  overbearing  enemy  ! 
This  question  has  already  been  answered  in  ver. 
6.  The  people  has  forsaken  the  one  God,  and 
worships  many  idol  gods.  Falling  away  from  the 
national  faith,  it  has  fallen  into  the  disintegration 
of  egoism.  The  tribes  are  divided  by  their  special 
J  idols,  their  respective  evil  consciences,  and  by  local 
selfishness.  Only  one  thing  is  common  to  all,— 
despondency  and  powerlessness ;  for  the  ideal 
spirit  of  the  theocratic  people,  the  source  of  union 
and  courage,  is  wanting.  Hence,  after  long  dis- 
tress, they  ail  share  in  a  common  feeling  of  repen- 
tance. They  come  now  to  the  tabernacle,  long 
neglected  —  for  while  attending  at  near  and  local 
idol  temples,  they  have  forgotten  to  visit  the  Hous& 
of  God  —  and  say :  we  have  sinned. 

Vers.  11,  12.  And  Jehovah  said  to  the  sons 
of  Israel,  Not  from  Mizraim  (Egypt),  and  from 
the  Amorite,  from  the  sons  of  Ammon,  and 
from  the  Philistines  !  It  is  the  Priest  who  an- 
swers  the  people,  in  the  name  of  God,  through 
Urim  and  Tbummim,  as  in  ch.  i.  1 .  It  has  been 
observed  that  in  ver.  6  seven  different  national  idols 
are  enumerated  as  having  been  served  by  Israel,  and 
that  in  vers.  U  and  12  seven  nations  are  named, 
out  of  whose  hand  Israel  had  been  delivered.  The 
number  seven  is  symbolical  of  consummation  and 
completion.  All  false  gods,  whom  Israel  has  fool- 
ishly   served,    are    included    with    those    that    are 

likely.  Hitherto,  apostasy  and  servitude  have  always  fol- 
lowed the  death  of  the  Judge.  If  the  present  case  were  an 
exception,  the  narrator  would  certainly  have  noted  it  as 
such.     The  use   of   the   word    "  this,"   would   perhaps    be 


•rs  (Usher,  Bush,  etc.)  make  it  the   last   year   both   of  the  j  quiUi  plai[li  jf  m  could  haTe  a  gilnce  at  the  sources  from 
ippresnion  and  of  Jair's  life.     But  this  is  altogether  un-    WQich  the  Darrator  here  draws.  —  Te.) 


160 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


n.imed  in  ver.  6,  from  the  northeast  and  southeast, 
the  northwest  and  southwest.  Such,  undoubtedly, 
is  likewise  the  sense  uf  vers.  11  and  12.  To  Israel's 
prayer  for  deliverance  from  Amnion  in  the  land  of 
the  Amorite,  and  from  the  Philistines,  God  re- 
plies, reproachfully  :  that  Israel  bears  itself  as  if  it 
had  sinned  for  the  first  time,  and  asked  deliverance 
in  consideration  of  its  repentance.  But,  says  God, 
from  of  old  I  have  liberated  you  from  all  the  na- 
tions that  surround  you,  —  from  Egypt  first,  and 
from  every  nation  that  troubled  you  —  east,  west, 
north,  and  south,  —  in  turn.  The  voice  of  God 
speaks  not  in  the  style  of  narrative,  but  in  the 
tone  of  impassioned  discourse.  Under  general 
descriptions,  it  comprehends,  with  rhetorical  vigor, 
special  occurrences.  It  introduces  the  Ammonites, 
Philistines,  and  Amorites,  immediately  after  Egypt, 
because  these  nations  are  now  in  question.  Have 
I  not  already,  since  your  exodus  from  Egypt,  given 
you  peace,  even  from  these  very  Philistines  (Ex. 
xiii.  17),  Ammonites  (Num.  xxi.  24).  and  Amorites 
(Num.  xxi.  21  ff)  >  Thereupon,  the  discourse  passes 
over  into  another  construction  ;  for  from  the  ancient 
part  it  turns  now  to  events  of  more  recent  times. 
In  those  early  times,  when  Moses  led  you,  you  saw 
no  oppression,  but  only  victory.  Later,  when  Zi- 
donians,  Amalekites,  and  Maonites  oppressed  you, 
I  helped  you  at  your  cry.  All  three  names  in- 
dicate only  in  a  general  way,  the  quarters  from  which 
the  more  recent  attacks  had  come.  Since  Joshua's 
death,  Israel  had  experienced  only  one  attack 
from  the  north  and  northeast,  all  others  had  come 
from  the  east  and  southwest.  That  from  the  north, 
\ias  the  act  of  Jabin,  king  of  Canaan.  It  is  true, 
that  in  the  narrative  of  Barak's  victory,  the  name 
Zidonians  does  not  occur  ;  but  Zidon  is  in  emphatic 
language  the  representative,  the  mother,  as  she  is 
called,  of  Phoenicia,  i.  e.  Canaan.  In  a  like  gen- 
eral sense  do  Amalek  and  Maon  here  stand  for 
those  eastern  tribes  from  whose  predatory  incur- 
sions Israel  had  suffered;  for  Amalek,  the  earliest 
and  most  implacable  enemy  of  Israel,  assisted  both 
Midian  and  Moab  in  their  attacks.  Thus  also,  the 
mention  of  Maon  becomes  intelligible.  Modern  ex- 
positors (even  Keil)  consider  the  Septuagint  read- 
ing MaSiaji  (Midian)  to  be  the  correct  one.  We 
cannot  adopt  this  view ;  for  this  reason,  if  no 
other,  that  difficult  readings  are  to  be  preferred 
to  plain  ones.  Maon  is  the  name  of  the  southeast- 
ern wilderness,  familiar  to  us  from  David's  history. 
The  name  has  evidently  been  preserved  in  the 
Maon  of  Arabia  Petraea  (cf.  Ritter,  xiv.  1005). 
Amalek  and  Maon  represent  the  Bedouin  tribes, 
who  from  this  quarter  attacked  Israel.  Every 
point  from  which  Israel  could  be  assailed  has  thus 
been  included;  for  the  first  three  nations,  Philis- 
tines, Ammonites,  and  Amorites,  range  from  the 
southwest  to  the  northeast,  just  as  the  other  three, 
Zidonians,  Amalekites,  and  Maonites,  reach  from 
the  northwest  to  the  southeast. 

Vers,  13-16.  Go,  and  cry  unto  the  gods 
which  ye  have  chosen.  From  all  nations,  says 
the  voice  of  God,  have  I  liberated  you.  It  has 
been  demonstrated  to  you  that  I  am  your  true  De- 
liverer, and  that  all  the  tribes  round  about  you 
are  your  enemies,  especially  when  they  perceive 
that  you  have  forsaken  Me.  Every  part  of  your 
land  teaches  this  lesson;  and  yet  you  apostatize 
always  anew.  I  have  chosen  you  without  any 
merit  on  your  part,  to  be  a  great  nation,  and  you 
have  left  Me  ;  go,  therefore,  in  this  your  time  of 
need,  and  get  you  help  from  the  idol  gods  whom 
vou  have  chosen  in  my  place.  This  answer  cuts 
ihe  sharper,  because  the  idols  to  whose  service  Is- 


rael apostatized,  were  identical  with  the  very  na- 
tions by  whom  they  were  oppressed.  For  every 
idol  was  national  or  local  in  its  character.  God 
speaks  here  with  a  sorrow  like  that  of  a  human 
father  who  addresses  an  inconsiderate  child.  Noth 
ing  but  a  sharp  goad  of  reprehension  and  threat- 
ening will  drive  it  to  serious  and  thorough  consid- 
eration. But  though  inconsiderate,  it  neverthe- 
less continues  to  be  a  child.  The  father,  thougL 
for  the  present  he  disown  it,  cannot  in  good  earnest 
intend  to  abandon  it  altogether.  And,  in  truth, 
Israel  did  not  miscalculate.  When  they  not  only 
confessed  their  sins,  but  even  wdthout  any  visible 
assistance,  imitated  Gideon,  and  in  faith  remc  ed 
their  idol  altars,  the  anger  of  their  Father  was  at 

an  end.  The  phrase  1tt??3  ~,?M^13,  elsewhere 
employed  of  men  (cf.  Num.  xxi.  4,  where  the  peo- 
ple find  the  way  of  the  wilderness  too  long),  is  here 
applied  with  artless  beauty  to  Israel's  tender 
Father.  "  His  soul  became  too  short "  for  the 
misery  of  Israel,  i.  e.  the  misery  of  the  penitent 
people  endured  too  long  for  Him.  He  could  no 
longer  bring  himself  to  cherish  anger  against  them. 
The  love  of  God  is  no  rigid  human  consistency: 
it  is  eternal  freedom.  Man's  parental  love  is  its 
image,  albeit  an  image  obscured  by  sin.  The  par- 
able of  the  Prodigal  Son,  especially,  gives  us  some 
conception  of  the  wonderful  inconsistency  of  God, 
by  which  after  chastisement  He  recalls  the  penitent 
sinner  to  himself.  Nothing  but  the  freedom  of 
God's  love  —  ever  right  as  well  as  free  —  secures 
the  world's  existence.  Love  —  as  only  God  loves ; 
love,  which  loves  for  God's  sake  ;  love,  that  par- 
dons the  penitent  offender  seven  and  seventy  times, 
—  is  true  consistency.  Put  away  the  strange 
gods,  and  the  withered  stock  will  become  green 
again.  This  Israel  experiences  anew,  and  first  in 
Gilead. 

This  notice,  however  brief,  of  the  removal  of  all 
strange  gods,  and  of  Israel's  return  to  Jehovah,  ia 
the  necessary,  intimately  connected,  introduction 
to  the  narrative  of  the  deeds  of  Jephthah.  It  is  in- 
dispensable to  the  understanding  of  his  victory  and 
suffering.  It  explains,  moreover,  why  in  the  nar- 
rative concerning  him,  only  the  name  Jehovah  ap- 
pears. It  teaches  us  to  consider  the  nature  and 
measure  of  that  lite  in  which  God,  once  lost  but 
found  again,  reigns  and  rules. 


HOMILETICAb  AND  PRACTICAL. 

Apostasy  and  Repentance.  Neither  Deborah's 
jubilant  song  of  triumph,  nor  Gideon's  exulting 
trumpet  notes,  could  secure  succeeding  generations 
of  Israel  against  renewed  apostasy.  It  reappeared 
even  after  a  season  of  quiet  piety.  But  equally 
sure  was  the  coming  of  divine  judgments.  They 
came  from  all  sides,  in  ever-growing  severity  and 
magnitude.  The  gods  of  the  heathen  brought  no 
help,  —  for  they  were  nothing ;  and  yet  for  their 
sake  had  Israel  betrayed  its  living  God.  Then 
Israel  began  seriously  to  reflect.  They  not  merely 
wept,  they  did  works  of  true  repentance.  And 
whenever,  bv  prayer  and  actions,  they  call  upon 
their  merciful  God,  He,  like  a  tender  father,  cannot 
withstand  them.     He  hears  and  answers. 

Not  so  do  men  act  toward  each  other ;  and  yet 
they  arc  called  on  to  walk  in  the  footsteps  of  Christ. 
What  wonder  that  men  find  their  kindness  ill  re- 
quited, when  God  experiences  a  similar  treatment ! 
lint  how  then  dare  they  cherish  anger,  when  be- 
sought  for   reconciliation  !      If  God  was  moved 


CHAPTER  X.   17,18. 


161 


how  can  we  remain  untouched?  Anil  yetgrudge- 
bearing  is  a  characteristic  against  which  even  pious 
Christians  bear  no  grudge.  The  sinless  God  tor- 
gives,  and  gives  ever  anew,  —  and  witnesses  of  God, 
men  of  'theological  pursuits,  cherish  ill-will  and 
rancor  lor  years  ' 

"  How  well,  my  friend,  in  God  thou  livest, 
Appears  from  how  thy  debtor  thou  forgivest." 

Starke  :  Men  are  very  changeable  and  incon- 
stant, and  prone  to  decline  from  the  right  way  ; 
neither  sufficiently  moved  by  kindness,  nor  in- 
fluenced by  punishment. —  The  same  :  True  re- 
pentance consists  not  in  words  but  in  deeds.  — 


Ijisco  :  Israel  confesses  its  guilt  and  ill-desert 
and  gives  itself  wholly  up  to  God's  will  and  right 
eons  chastening ;  yet,  full  of  faith,  asks  for  mer- 
ciful, albeit  unmerited,  deliverance.  —  Gerlach  : 
That  the  Lord  first  declares  that  He  will  no  longer 
help  Israel,  afterwards,  however,  takes  compassion 
on  them  and  makes  their  cause  his  own,  is  a  rep- 
resentation which  repeats  itself  frequently  in  the 
Old  Testament.  Each  of  its  opposite  elements  is 
true  and  consistent  with  the  other,  as  soon  as  we 
call  to  mind  that  God,  notwithstanding  his  eter- 
nity and  unchangeableneis,  lives  with  and  loves 
his  people  in  time,  and  under  human  forms  and 
conditions. 


Repentance  followed  by  energy,  concord,  and  mutual  confidence. 
Chapter    X.  17,  18. 

17  Then  [And]  the  children  [sons]  of  Atnmon  were  gathered  together,  and  en- 
camped in  Gilead.     And  the  children    [sons]   of  Israel   assembled  themselves  to- 

18  gether,  and  encamped  in  Mizpeh  [Mizpah].  And  the  people  and  princes  [the 
people  (namely)  the  chief's]  of  Gilead  said  one  to  another,  What  man  is  he  [Who 
is  the  man]  that  will  [doth]  begin  to  fight  against  the  children  [sons]  of  Ammon  ? 
he  shall  be  head  over  all  the  inhabitants  of  Gilead. 


exegetical  and  doctrinal. 

The  call  of  Gideon  to  be  a  deliverer  took  place 
just  when  the  national  distress  was  at  its  greatest 
height,  and  Midian  had  entered  on  a  new  expedi- 
tion of  pillage  and  plunder.  A  like  coincidence 
marked  the  present  crisis.  The  sons  of  Amnion 
were  just  making  a  new  incursion  into  Gilead,  when 
they  met  with  a  new  spirit.  The  signature  of 
apostasy  and  sin,  is  discewd  and  weakness,  despon- 
dency and  self-seeking,  issuing  in  failure  and  dis- 
aster, whenever  action  be  undertaken.  The  sign  of 
conversion  and  true  penitence  is  concord  and  con- 
fidence, leading,  by  God's  assistance,  to  victory. 

Ver.  1 7 .  And  the  sons  of  Amnion  were  gath- 
ered together  ....  the  sons  of  Israel  also 
assembled  themselves.  The  phrase  "  sons  of  Is- 
rael "  does  not  always  include  all  the  tribes.  The 
men  of  any  single  tribe  may  be  so  designated.  The 
narrator  uses  the  expression  here,  however,  in  or- 
der to  intimate  that  though  Gilead  alone  actually 
engages  in  the  war  it  is  nevertheless  done  as  Is- 
rael, according  to  the  mind  and  spirit  of  the  whole 
nation.  As  soon  as  Israel  repents,  the  collective 
national  spirit,  the  consciousness  of  national  unity 
through  the  calling  of  God,  reawakes  in  each  of  the 
tribes.  The  localities  at  which  the  respective 
armies  are  said  to  have  assembled  and  prepared  for 
the  conflict,  will  be  considered  under  ch.  xi.  29. 

Ver.  18.    And  the  body  of  the  nobles  of  Gil- 

1  [Dr  Cassel  evidently  takes  D^il  as  Stat,  const. 
Scarcely  correct.  First,  because  of  the  article  (cf.  Gefl. 
3ram.  119,  2);  and,  secondly,  because    QV    never    stands 


11 


ead  said.  The  hitherto  cowed  Israelites  assembled 
themselves ;  but  that  was  not  all :  they  were  more- 
over united  in   all  they  did.     The  narrative  says 

expressly  ~^7?  ^J?  E3JH,  "  the  people  of  the 
nobles  of  Gilead,"  i.  e.  all,  without  exception.1  No 
envious,  self-seeking  voice  of  protest  or  dissent  was 
heard.  In  times  in  which  distress  is  recognized 
with  real  repentance,  private  interests  cease  to  gov- 
ern. People  then  begin  to  honor  truth  and  actual 
merit.  No  deference  is  then  paid  to  personal 
vanity,  family  connections,  or  wealth;  but,  all  by- 
views  and  self-seeking  being  set  aside,  he  is  sought 
after  who  renders  service.  The  nobles  of  Gilead 
could  not  more  clearly  indicate  their  new  temper, 
than  by  unitedly  promising  to  subordinate  them- 
selves to  him  who  begins  to  render  the  banners  of 
Israel  once  more  victorious,  as  their  head. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  they  say,  ''  whoso  beginntth 
to  fight  against  the  sons  of  Ammon."  In  him  who 
first  again  gains  an  advantage  over  the  enemy  in 
battle,  it  will  be  manifest  that  God  is  with  him. 
He,  accordingly,  is  to  be,  not  what  Gideon's  legions 

desired  him  to  become,  their  ^tt'O,  ruler,  nor  what 
the  sinful  people  of  Shechem  made  of  Abimeleth, 
their  'iT!?P,  king,  but  their  B7M"\  leader.  Him, 
who  conquers  with  God,  they  desire  to  follow 
unanimously,  as  a  common  head. 
And  this  one  soon  appeared. 

for  the  mere  notion  of  totality.     It  is  better  to  take  ^""l^? 

IV  /D  as  standing  in  apposition  to  DVH  ;  "the  people 
(namely)  the  chiefs  of  Gilead,"  i.  e.  the  people  through  theb 
chiefe,  as  represented  by  them.  —  Tft.] 


162  THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


The  previous  history  and  exile  of  Jephthah.     His  recall  by  the  elders  of  Gilead. 

Chapter    XL  1-11. 

1  Now  [And]  Jephthah  the  Gileadite  was  a  mighty  man  of  valour  [a  valiant  hero], 

2  and  he  was  the  son  of  an  harlot :  and  Gilead  begat  Jephthah.  And  Gilead's  wife 
bare  him  sons  ;  and  his  [the]  wife's  sons  grew  up,  and  they  thrust  [drove]  out 
Jephthah,  and  said   unto  him.  Thou  shalt  not  inherit  in  our   father's    house ;  for 

3  thou  art  the  son  of  a  strange  [another]  woman.  Then  [And]  Jephthah  tied  from 
his  brethren,  and  dwelt  in  the  land  of  Tob  :  and  there  were  gathered  [there  gath- 
ered themselves]  vain  men    [lit.  empty  men,  i. «.  adventurers]  1  to  Jephthah,  and  went  out 

4  with  him.     And  it  came  to  pass  in  process  of  [after  a  considerable]  time,   that  the 

5  children  [sons]  of  Amnion  made  war  against  [with]  Israel.  And  it  was  so,  that 
when  the  children  [sons]  of  Amnion  made  war   against  [with]  Israel,  the  elders  of 

6  Gilead  went  to  fetch  Jephthah  out  of  the  land  of  Tob  :   And  they  said  unto  Jephthah 
Come,  and  be  our  captain,  that  we  may  [and  let  us]  fight  with  the  children  [sonsj 

7  of  Amnion.  And  Jephthah  said  unto  the  elders  of  Gilead,  Did  not  ye  hate  me, 
and  expel  me  out  of  my  father's  house  ?  and  why  are  ye  come  unto  me  now  when 

8  ye  are  in  distress  ?  And  the  elders  of  Gilead  said  unto  Jephthah,  Therefore  we 
turn  again  to  thee  now,  that  thou  mayest  go  with  us,  and  light  against  the  children 

9  [sons]  of  Ammon,  and  be  our  head  over  all  the  inhabitants  of  Gilead.  And  Jeph- 
thah said  unto  the  elders  of  Gilead,  If  ye  bring  me  home  [back]  again  to  fight 
against  the   children   [sons]   of  Ammon,  and  the   Lord   [Jehovah]   deliver  them 

10  before  me.  shall  I  [then  I  will]  be  your  head  ?  [.]  And  the  elders  of  Gilead  said 
unto  Jephthah,  The  Lord   [Jehovah]  be  witness  [lit.  hearer]  between  us,  if  we 

11  do  not  so  according  to  thy  words  [word].  Then  Jephthah  went  with  the  elders 
of  Gilead,  and  the  people'2  made  [placed]  him  [for  a]  head  and  captain  over  them: 
and  Jephthah  uttered  all  his  words  before  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  in  Mizpeh  [Miz- 
pah]. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

rl  Ver.  3  —  D*p^H,  Dr.  Cassel  here  (cf.  ch.  Ix.  4)  renders,  lots  Leuu,  loose,  unsettled  persons.  In  his  article  on 
«  Jephthah  !*  in  Herzog's  Real-Enryk/opd'lict  vi.  466,  he  describes  them  as  —  *  people  who  had  nothing  to  lose.  Tha 
character  and  condition  of  such  persons  is  more  definitely  described  in  1  Sam.  xxii.  2,  where  distressed  persons,  embar- 
rassed debtors,  and  men  of  wild  dispositions,  are  said  to  have  attached  themselves  to  the  fugitive  David."  To  prevent 
erroneous  inferences,  it  is  necessary  to  add  the  next  sentence  :  «  But  that  Jephthah,  like  David,  engaged  in  marauding 
expeditions,  cannot  be  proved."  —  Tr.1 

T2  Ver.  11.  —  DVn      Dr.  Cassel  :    Gesammtheit  —  «  the  collective  body,"  —  evidently  with  reference  to  his  previous 

L  T    T 

rendering  in  ch.  x.  18.    Cf.  note  1,  p.  161.  —  Tb..] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

The  story  of  Jephthah  is  one  of  the  most  re- 
markable episodes  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures.  But 
al  the  same  time  it  is  one  of  those  episodes  which, 
from  being  too  exclusively  considered  in  the  charac- 
ter of  disconnected  fragments,  have  been  subjected 
both  anciently  and  in  modern  times,  to  the  most  sin- 
gular misapprehensions  and  distortions.  It  gives 
the  moral  likeness  of  an  Israelitish  tribe,  in  the  time 
of  its  awakening  and  return  to  God.  Manasseh  is 
again  the  cooperating  tribe,  —  not  the  western  half, 
'■"■vever,  but  the  eastern,  its  equal  in  warlike  spirit 


the  time  of  his  success  and  greatness,  it  is  he  alone 
who  keeps  and  upholds  the  divine  life  in  the  na- 
tion. 

The  history  of  Jephthah  furnishes  a  different 
picture.  Gilead  too  had  sinned,  but  it  had  repented. 
The  whole  people  had  put  away  its  false  gods, 
before  it  found  its  hero.  This  hero,  on  his  part, 
finds  himself  supported  hy  a  spiritually  awakened 
tribe,  thoroughly  animated  vith  the  spirit  of  faith 
and  obedience  toward  Jehovah.  Every  part  of  the 
picture  is  projected  on  a  background  of  true  piety. 
Jephthah  is  the  hero,  the  leader,  the  head  of  the 
tribe:  but  he  is  not  the  onlv  one  whose  eves  are 


(1  Chr.  v.  24)  and  strength,  but  holding  a  relation  fixed  on  God  ;  the  whole  tribe,  like  members  of 
:o  the  hero  who  appears  among  them  different  I  the  head,  obey  the  same  attraction.  It  is  only  be- 
from  that  formerly  held  by  the  other  toward  Oid- .  cause  this  background  was  ignored,  i.  e.  because 
eon.  When  Gideon  entered  on  his  work,  every-  the  connection  between  chapters  x.  and  xi.  was 
thing  depended  on  his  own  personality.  No  di- !  overlooked,  that  the  principal  incident  in  the  his- 
rine  awakening  had  preceded,  not  even  in  his  own  I  tory  of  Jephthah  has  from  the  earliest  times  given 
.itv.  In  his  own  house,  there  was  an  altar  to  be]  rise  to  such  singular  explanations. 
lestroyed.  The  number  of  those  who  deserved  to  Vers.  1,2.  And  Jephthah  the  Gileadite  was 
tic  his  followers  was  only  three  hundred.      Even  in  I  a  valiant  hero.     The  same  terms  were  aoplied  M 


CHAPTER  XL   1-11. 


163 


Gideon  by  the  Messenger  of  God  (eh.  vi.  12).  The 
nobles  of  Gilead  had  determined  (ch.  x.  18)  to  elect 
as  their  leader,  him  who  should  give  evidence  that 
God  is  with  him,  by  beginning  to  wage  successful 
warfare.  Thereupon  the  narrative  proceeds : 
"  And  Jephthah  was  a  valiant  hero."  It  was  he 
joncernine  whom  they  learned  that  he  answered 
their  description.  His  history  is  then  related.  A 
noble  of  Gilead  had  begotten  him  by  a  public  har- 
lot, and  taken  him  into  his  house.  The  name  of 
the  father  is  unknown.  In  the  statement:  "  Gil- 
ead begat  Jephthah  ;  "  and  also  when  we  read  of 
the  "wife  of  Gilead;"  the  term  "Gilead,"  as 
trit  e  name,  takes  the  place  of  the  unknown  per- 
son il  name.  Not,  indeed,  as  if  "  Gilead  "  could 
not  be  a  personal  name ;  but  if  it  were,  Jephthah 
would  have'  been  designated  as  "  son  of  Gilead." 
and  not  as  a  "  Gileadite,"  without  any  paternal 
surname,  as  he  is  styled  at  the  first  mention, 
when  he  enters  on  the  scene,  and  at  the  last,  when 
he  dies  (ch.  xii.  7).  This  conclusion  is  strength- 
ened by  a  comparison  with  the  names  of  other  he- 
rn,-- ;  with  that  of  his  predecessor  Gideon,  for  in- 
stance, who  is  constantly  styled  the  "  son  of 
Jja>h  :  "  and  also,  among  others,  with  that  of  one 
of  his  successors,  "  Elon  the  Zebulonite  (ch.  xii. 
1 1),  as  to  whom  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  he  was 
of  the  tribe  of  Zebulun,  and  had  no  more  definite 
patronymic.  —  The  father,  subsequently,  had  other 
sons  by  his  lawful  wife.  These,  when  they  had 
grown  up,  and  their  father  had  died,  expelled 
Gideon  from  the  house,  although  the  eldest ;  for, 
said  they,  — 

Thou  art  the  son  of  another  woman  (HtffS 
/"HPN).  "Other"  is  here  to  be  taken  in  a  bad 
sense,  as  in  the  expression  "other  (acherim)  gods." 
As  those  are  spurious  gods,  so  "  another  ishah  "  is 
a  spurious  wife.  The  expulsion  of  Jephthah  was 
a  base  act ;  for  his  father  had  reared  him  in  his 
house,  and  left  him  there,  and  he  was  the  oldest 
child.  The  act  cannot  be  compared  with  the  re- 
moval of  Ishmael  and  the  sons  of  Keturah  from 
the  house  of  Abraham.  Those  the  father  himself 
dismissed  with  presents.  But  Jephthah's  father 
had  kept  him  in  the  house,  and  had  thus  signified 
his  purpose  to  treat  him  as  a  son.  Nevertheless, 
Jephthah  could  obtain  no  redress  from  the  "  elders 
of  Gilead  "  (ver.  7).  If  he  had  been  the  son  of  one 
who  was  properly  a  wife,  his  brothers  would  doubt- 
less have  been  obliged  to  admit  him  to  a  share  in 
the  inheritance  ;  for  Rachel,  the  ancestress  of  Gil- 
ead, had  also  several  co-wives,  whose  sons  —  of 
whom,  be  it  observed  in  passing,  Gad  in  Gilead 
was  one  —  inherited  as  well  as  Joseph  himself. 
But  they  maintained  that  his  mother  had  not  been 
a  wife  of  their  father  at  all,  not  even  one  of  sec- 
ondary rank,  —  that  she  was  nothing  but  an 
harlot.  On  the  ground  of  bastardy,  they  could 
drive  him  out  of  the  house;  and  at  that  time,  no 
voice  raised  itself  in  Gilead  but  that  of  mockery 
and  hatred  toward  Jephthah.  Such  being  the  case 
te  fled. 

Ver.  3.  And  dwelt  in  the  land  of  Tob-  The 
name  Tob  is  found  again  in  2  Sam.  x.  6,  in 
connection  with  a  war  of  the  Ammonites  against 
king  David.  Its  subsequent  mention  in  the  Books 
of  its  Mac&iuees  (I.  ch.  v.  13;  II.  xii.  17),  asTai|3, 
Toil/?,  affords  no  material  assistance  to  any  attempt 
at  identification.  But  since  Jephthah  flees  thither 
as  to  an  asylum ;  and  since  adventurers  collect 
about  him  there,  as  in  a  region  of  safety,  whence 
ne  is  able  to  make  successful  expeditions,  we  may 


be  justified  perhaps  to  hazard  a  conjecture  which 
would  tend  to  increase  our  knowledge  of  the  Hau- 

ran.     Erets  tob  (3112^7!^?)  means  good  land,  and 

fertile,  as  Canaan  is  said  to  be  (Ex.  iii.  8).  The 
best  land  in  Hauran,  still  named  from  its  fertility, 
and  with  which  Wetzstein  has  made  us  again  ac- 
quainted, is  the  Ruhbeh,  in  eastern  Hauran.  Its 
name  signifies,  "  fertile  cornfield."  It  is  the  best 
land  in  Syria.  It  is  still  the  seat  of  Bedouin  tribes, 
who  extend  their  pillaging  expeditions  far  and 
wide.  Of  the  present  tribes,  Wetzstein  relates  that 
they  frequently  combine  with  the  Zubed,  whose 
name  reminds  us  of  the  Zabadeans  ( 1  Mace.  xii. 
31).  Their  land  is  an  excellent  place  of  refuge, 
difficult  of  attack,  and  easily  defended. 

At  the  head  of  adventurous  persons  whom  the 
report  which  soon  went  out  concerning  his  valor, 
had  collected  about  him,  he  made  warlike  expedi- 
tions like  those  of  David  (1  Sam.  xxii.  2),  directed, 
as  David's  were  also,  against  the  enemies  of  his 
nation.  Of  the  son  of  Jesse,  it  is  true,  we  know 
for  certain  that,  notwithstanding  his  banishment, 
he  attacked  and  defeated  the  Philistines  (cf.  1  Sam. 
xxiii.  1  ff.) ;  but  though  we  have  no  such  direct 
statements  concerning  Jephthah,  we  yet  have 
good  grounds  for  concluding  that  his  expeditions 
were  directed  against  the  Ammonites.  For  he 
evinced  himself  to  be  a  mighty  hero  ;  and  the  Gil- 
eaditish  nobles  had  pledged  themselves  to  elect 
him  as  their  head  who  should  initiate  victories  over 
Amnion.  Therefore,  when  their  choice  falls  on 
Jephthah,  it  must  be  because  they  have  heard  of 
his  deeds  in  the  land  of  Tob  against  this  enemy.  — 
Modern  writers,  especially,  have  made  a  real  Abal- 
lino  of  Jephthah,  steeped  in  blood  and  pillage. 
The  character  belongs  to  him  as  little  as  to  David. 
Though  banished,  he  was  a  valiant  guerilla  chief- 
tain of  his  people  against  their  enemies.  He  was 
the  complete  opposite  of  an  Abimelech.  The  lat- 
ter sought  adventurers  (DNi7*T?)  for  a  wicked  deed  ; 
to  Jephthah,  as  to  David,  they  come  of  their  own 
accord  and  subordinate  themselves  to  him.  Abime- 
lech was  without  cause  an  enemy  of  his  father's 
house,  and  dipped  his  sword  in  the  blood  of  his 
own  brothers.  Jephthah,  hanished  and  persecuted 
by  his  brothers,  turned  his  strength  against  the 
enemies  of  Israel ;  and  when  recalled,  cherished 
neither  revenge  nor  grudge  in  his  heart.  Abime- 
lech had  fallen  away  from  God ;  Jephthah  was  his 
faithful  servant.  All  this  appears  from  his  words 
and  conduct. 

Vers.  4-6.  And  after  a  considerable  time  it 
came  to  pass  that  the  sons  of  Ammon  made  war 
with  Israel.  It  was  during  the  time  of  sin  and 
impenitence,  that  Jephthah  was  driven  away  by 
violence  and  hatred.  He  returned  as  an  elderly 
man,  with  a  grown-up  daughter.  The  Ammonit- 
ish  conflict  and  oppression  lasted  eighteen  years. 
The  flight  of  Jephthah  to  Tob  occurred  probably 
some  time  previous  to  the  beginning  of  these 
troubles.  In  the  course  of  these  years  he  had 
acquired  fame,  rest,  house,  and  possessions.  He 
had  found  God.  and  God  was  with  him.  If  this 
were  not  his  character,  he  would  not  have  met  the 
■•  elders  of  Gilead  "  as  he  did.  Meanwhile,  how 
ever,  another  spirit  had  asserted  itself  in  Gilead 
also.  For  it  is  the  sign  of  new  life,  that  the  elders 
of  Gilead  do  not  shun  the  humiliation  of  going  to 
Jephthah.  To  be  sure,  they  must  have  been  in- 
formed that  he  also  served  no  strange  gods  ;  for  how 
otherwise  could  he  be  of  service  to  them  ?  In 
any  case,  however,  it  was  no  small  matter  to  go  tc 


1B4 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


the  hei  o  whom,  not  his  brothers  only,  but  they  also, 
the  judges,  had  once  ignominiousiy  driven  forth, 
and  now  sav  to  him  :  Come  with  us,  and  be  our 

captain!  (^2j?:  a  leader  in  war,  and  according 
to  later  usage  in  peace  also. ) 

Vers.  7-9.  And  Jephthah  said  unto  the  elders 
of  Gilead,  Did  ye  not  hate  me.  and  expel  me 
out  of  my  father's  house  ?  The  interview  be- 
tween him  and  the  elders  affords  a  striking  proof 
of  the  subduing  influence  which  the  confession  of 
God  exercises,  even  over  persons  of  vigorous  and 
warlike  spirits.  Jephthah's  speech  does  not  conceal 
the  reproach,  that  after  the  hard  treatment  he  re- 
ceived, they  should  have  invited  him  back  before 
this,  not  first  now  when  they  are  in  distress.  He 
speaks  in  a  strain  similar  to  that  in  which  the 
voice  of  God  itself  had  recently  addressed  Israel 
(ch.  x.  11). 

And  nobly  do  "  the  elders  "  answer  him.  For 
that  very  reason,  say  they,  because  we  are  in  dis- 
tress, do  we  come  to  thee.  Such  being  the  fact, 
thou  wilt  surely  come.  Did  matters  stand  differ- 
ently, thou  wouldest  probably  (and  not  unjustly) 
refuse;  but  as  it  is,  we  call  thee  to  go  with  us  to 
fight,  and  be  our  head  over  all  the  inhabitants  of 
Gilead.  The  satisfaction  thus  made  to  Jephthah 
is  indeed  great ;  but  the  danger  and  responsibility 
to  which  he  is  invited  are  not  less  eminent.  His 
answer,  nevertheless,  exhibits  no  longer  any  trace 
of  sensitiveness  or  pride.  If  his  tribe  call  him  to 
fight,  he  will  obey  their  summons  —  as  all  heroes 
have  ever  done,  who  loved  their  native  land.  He, 
however,  does  it  under  a  yet  nobler  impulse.  Un- 
der other  circumstances  —  such  is  the  underlying 
thought  —  I  would  not  have  come  to  be  your  head. 
If  you  were  now  as  heretofore,  who  would  wish  to 
come !  for  far  as  it  is  from  being  a  blessing  to  the 
trees  when  the  thorn-bush  reigns,  so  far  is  it  from 
pleasing  to  a  noble  mind  to  rule  over  thorn-bushes. 
But  since  you  come  to  get  me  to  fight  with  you 
against  Amnion  —  full  of  a  new  spirit,  so  that  I 
can  cherish  the  hope  that  God  will  deliver  the 
enemy  before  me  —  1  consent  to  be  your  head.  It 
is  not  to  be  overlooked  that  Jephthah  speaks  of 
"Jehovah,"  not  of  "Elohim,"  and  that  he  places 
the  issue  in  God's  hand ;  for,  as  ch.  x.  teaches, 
Gilead  had  learned  to  see  that  only  God  can  help. 
Jephthah  is  called  because  God's  Spirit  is  recog- 
nized in  him.  Verse  9  has  often  been  taken  as  a 
question  ;  a  construction  which  Keil  has  already, 
and  very  properly,  rejected.1  The  position  of 
affairs  has  altogether  erroneously  been  so  appre 
bended,  as  if  Jephthah  were  fearful  lest,  after  vic- 
tory achieved,  they  would  then  no  longer  recog- 
nize him  as  head,  and  wished  to  assure  himself  on 
this  point  beforehand.  This  view  originates  in 
the  failure  to  perceive  the  spiritual  background  on 
which  the  action  is  projected.  Jephthah  is  not  a 
man  who  will  be  their  head  at  any  cost.  There  is 
no  trace  of  ambition  in  his  language.  He  is  will- 
ing to  be  their  head,  if  they  are  such  members  as 
will  insure  the  blessing  of  God.  Whoever  knows 
his  countrymen  as  he  knew  them,  and  has  himself 
turned  to  God,  will  not  be  willing  to  be  their 
leader,  unless  they  have  become  other  than  they 
were.  For  that  reason  he  says  :  If  you  bring  me 
back,  in  order  truly  and  unitedly  to  fight  Am- 
nion, and  be  worthy  of  God's  blessing, — in  that 
;ase,  I  will  be  your  head.     The  guaranty  of  vic- 

1  [Xeil  observes  that  the  reply  of  the  elders  in  ver.  10, 

.Ttf3?3  }3   tT*"0"1T,  "presupposes   an   affirmative,  not 

._    i ..      '   :  t  :  •  ' 
pa  interrogative  utterance  ou  the  pait  of  Jephthah.''    The 


tory  is  sought  by  this  valiant  man,  not  in  his  owt 
courage,  but  in  the  worthiness  of  the  warriors  be- 
fore God. 

Ver.  10.  Jehovah  be  a  hearer  between  us. 
if  we  do  not  so  according  to  thy  word.  They 
invoke  God,  whom  they  have  penitently  supplica- 
ted, as  witness ;  they  swear  by  Him  that  they  will 
do  whatever  Jephthah  will  command.  They  give 
him  thereby  a  guaranty,  not  only  that  as  soldiers 
they  will  obey  their  general,  but  also  that  in  theii 
conduct  towards  God  they  will  be  guided  by  their 
leader's  instruction  and  direction.  For  not  in 
military  discipline  only,  but  much  rather  in  the 
moral  and  religious  spirit  by  which  Israel  is  ani- 
mated, lies  his  hope  of  victory. 

Ver.  11.  And  Jephthah  spake  all  his  words 
before  Jehovah  in  Mizpah.  Jephthah  goes  along  , 
the  people — the  collective  nobility  —  make  him 
head  and  leader  ;  but  not  by  means  of  sin  and  dis- 
honor, as  Abimelech  became  king.  Jephthah  re- 
ceives his  appointment  from  the  hand  of  God.  In 
the  spirit  of  God,  he  enters  on  his  work.  As  chief 
tain,  it  devolves  on  him  to  tell  his  people  what 
course  must  be  pursued  :  he  does  it  in  the  presence 
of  God.  It  is  the  ancient  God  of  Israel  before 
whom,  at  Mizpah,  where  the  people  are  encamped, 
he  issues  his  regulations,  addresses,  and  military 
orders.     On  Mizpah,  see  at  ch.  xi.  29. 

Keil  has  justly  repelled  the  idea  that  the  expres- 
sion '"'J'"'?  ^S?^)  "before  Jehovah,"  necessarily 
implies  a  solemn  sacrificial  ceremony.  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  impossibility  of  such  a  solemnity 
cannot  be  maintained.  Whatever  the  ceremonial 
may  have  been,  the  meaning  is,  that  Jephthah,  iu 
speaking  all  his  words  before  God,  thereby  con- 
fessed Jehovah  and  his  law,  in  contradistinction  to 
heathenism  and  idolatry.  In  the  spirit  of  this  con 
fession,  he  entered  on  his  office. 

HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

The  manner  in  which  divine  compassion  fills 
men  with  his  Spirit,  for  the  salvation  of  Israel,  is 
wonderful.  The  inquiry  into  the  origin  of  the  he- 
roes who  suddenly  arise  in  Israel,  and  in  nations 
generally,  to  deliver  and  save,  is  one  which  leads 
down  into  the  profoundest  depths  of  divine  wisdom. 
The  selection  of  every  Israelitish  Judge  is  a  new 
sign  of  compassion,  but  also  of  corrective  chasten- 
ing. For  presumption  and  self-sufficiency  were  al- 
ways at  the  bottom  of  their  apostasies.  Hence, 
in  the  selection  of  the  Judges,  the  admonition  to 
humility  becomes  continually  more  urgent.  Israel 
is  made"  to  know  that  God  chooses  whom  He  wills, 
and  raises  from  the  dust  him  whom  the  people 
will  place  at  their  head.  They  have  already  ex- 
perienced this  in  the  cases  of  Ehud,  the  left-handed, 
of  Deborah,  a  woman,  of  Gideon,  the  youngest  and 
least  of  his  family.  All  these,  however,  had  been 
well-born  persons,  connected  with  the  people  by 
normal  relations.  In  Jephthah's  case,  the  choice 
becomes  still  more  extraordinary-  A  bastard,  an 
exile  and  adventurer,  must  be  gone  after.  The 
magnates  of  the  land  must  humble  themselves  to 
bring  the  exile  home,  to  submit  themselves  to  him, 
and  make  him  the  head  of  the  tribe.  That  they 
do  it,  is  proof  of  their  repentance;  that  the  choice 
is  just,  is  shown  by  the  result. 

^22K  (ver.  9)  is  simply  the  emphatic  correlativ*  of  the  pn 
ceding  □£!**•  —  TV] 


CHAPTER   XI.  12-28. 


165 


Thus,  many  a  stone,  rejected  by  the  builders, 
has,  typically,  even  before  Christ,  become  the  head 
of  the  corner.  Unbelief  deprives  a  nation  of  judg- 
ment. To  discern  spirits,  is  a  work  to  be  done 
only  by  an  inward  life  in  God.  Sin  expels  whom- 
soever it  cannot  overcome ;  but  penitence  recalls 
him,  whenever  it  perceives  the  ground  of  its  own 
distress.  Only  he,  however,  returns  without  a 
grudge  in  his  heart,  who  shares  in  the  penitence. 

Stakke  :  Men  are  accustomed  to  go  the  near- 
est way  ;  but  God  commonly  takes  a  roundabout 
way,  when  He  designs  to  make  one  noble  and 
great.1  —  The  same  :  Happy  he,  who  in  all  he 
speaks  and  does  looks  with  holy  reverence,  even 
though  it  be  not  expressed  in  words,  to  the  omnis- 
cient and  omnipresent  God ;  for  this  is  the  true 
foundation  of  all  faithfulness  and  integrity. 

[Bp.  Hall  :  The  common  gifts  of  God  respect 
not  the  parentage  or  blood,  but  are  indifferently 
scattered  where  He  pleases  to  let  them  fall.     The 

1  [Bp.  tT*T.r. :  « Men  love  to  go  the  nearest  way,  and 
often  fail.  God  commonly  goes  about,  and  in  his  own 
time  comes  surely  home."  —  Tr.J 


choice  of  the  Almighty  is  not  guided  by  oul 
rules:  as  in  spiritual,  so  in  earthly  things,  it  is  not 
in  him  that  willeth.  —  Scott  :  As  the  sins  of  par- 
ents so  often  occasion  disgrace  and  hardship  to 
their  children,  this  should  unite  with  higher  mo- 
tives, to  induce  men  to  govern  their  passions  ac 
cording  to  the  law  of  God.  —  Blsh  :  The  pre- 
tense of  legal  right,  is  often  a  mere  cover  to  the 
foulest  wrongs  and  injuries.  —  Henry  :  The  chil 
dren  of  Israel  were  assembled  and  encamped,  en. 
x.  17  ;  but,  like  a  body  without  a  head,  they  owned 
they  could  not  fight  without  a  commander.  So 
necessary  it  is  to  all  societies  that  there  be  Mime  te 
rule,  and  others  to  obey,  rather  than  that  every 
man  be  his  own  master.  Blessed  be  God  for  go\ 
eminent,  for  a  good  government !  —  Bp.  Hall  (on 
ver.  7)  :  Can  we  look  for  any  other  answer  from 
God  than  this  ?  Did  ye  not  drive  me  out  of  your 
houses,  out  of  your  hearts,  in  the  time  of  your 
health  and  jollity  ?  Did  ye  not  plead  the  strict- 
ness of  my  charge,  and  the  weight  of  my  yoke  ? 
Did  not  your  willful  sins  expel  me  from  your  souls  ' 
What  do  you  now,  crouching  and  creeping  to  ma 
in  the  evil  day  1  —  Te.] 


Jephthah's  diplomatic  negotiations  with  the  king  of  Ammon. 
Chapter  XI.    12-28. 


12  And  Jephthah  sent  messengers  unto  the  king  of  the  children  [sons]  of  Ammon, 
saying,  "What  hast  thou  to  do  with  me  [What  is  there  between  me  and  thee],  that 

13  thou  art  come  against  [uuto]  me  to  tight  in  my  land?  And  the  king  of  the  chil- 
dren [sons]  of  Ammon  answered  unto  the  messengers  of  Jephthah,  Because  1  Israel 
took  away  my  land,  when  they  [he]  came  up  out  of  Egypt,  from  Arnon  even  unto 
[the]  Jabbok,  and  unto   [the]  Jordan :  now  therefore   restore  those   lands   again 

14  peaceably.     And  Jephthah   sent  messengers   again   unto  the  king  of  the  children 

15  [sons]  of  Ammon  :  And  said  unto  him.  Thus  saith  Jephthah,  Israel  took  not  away 

16  the  land  of  Moab,  nor  the  land  of  the  children  [sons]  of  Ammon  :  But  [For]  when 
Israel  [they]  came  up  from  Egypt,  and  [then  Israel]  walked  through  the  wilderness 

17  unto  the  Red  Sea,  and  came  to  Kadesh  ;  [.]  Then  [And]  Israel  "  sent  messen- 
gers unto  the  king'  of  Edom,  saying,  Let  me,  I  pray  thee,  pass  through  thy 
land : b  but  the  king  of  Edom  would  not  hearken  [hearkened  not]  thereto.  And  in 
like  manner  they  sent  unto  the  king  of  Moab  ;  but  he  would  not  consent.    And  Is- 

18  rael  abode  in  Kadesh.  Then  they  went  along  through  the  wilderness,  and  com- 
passed c  the  land  of  Edom,  and  the  land  of  Moab,  and  came  by  [on]  the  east  side  d 
of  [to]  the  land  of  Moab,  and  pitched  [encamped]  on  the  other  [yonder]  side  of  Ar- 
non, but  came  not  within  the  border  of  Moab  :  for  Anion  was  [is]  the  border  of 

19  Moab.e  And  Israel  sent  messengers  unto  Sihon  king  of  the  Amorites/  the 
king  of  Heshbon  ;  and  Israel  said  unto  him,  Let  us  pass,  we  pray  thee,  through 

20  thy  lands  unto  my  place.  But  Sihon  trusted  not  Israel  to  pass  through  his 
coast  [territory]  :  but  Sihon  gathered  all  his  people  together,*  and  [they] 

21  pitched  [encamped]  in  Jahaz,  and  [he]  fought  against  [with]  Israel.'  And 
the  Lord  [Jehovah,  the]  God  of  Israel  delivered  Sihon  and  all  his  people  into  the 
hand  of  Israel,  and  they  smote  them;*  so   [and]  Israel  possessed  [took  possession 

t  Ver.  18.  —  Num.  xxi.  13. 
/  Ver.  19  —Num.  xxi.  21. 

g  Ver.  19.  — Num.  xxi.  22  has  rP3VW  for  ' 


a  Ver.  17-  —  The  words  printed  in  blackfaced  type  are 
ound  in  Num.  XX.  and  xxi.  The  first  part  of  ver.  17  is 
from  Num.  XX.  14,  except  that  there  tf  Moses  ''  takes  the 
place  of ''  Israel.'"  On  the  other  hand,  the  expression, 
"  Thus  saith  thy  brother  Israel,-'  there  used,  is  here  wanting. 

''  Ver.  17.  — Num.  xx.  17  ;  only,  rt  let  me  pass,'1  is  there 
read,  "  let  us  pass." 

c  Ver.  18  — Num.  xxi.  4  has   32D7. 
d  Ver   18— Num  xxi  11 


-may: 


S3. 

^  Ver.  20.  —  Num.  xxi.  23. 

i  Ver.  20  —  Num.  xxi.  23.  the  words  "  they  encamped  ' 
being  substituted  for  "  he  came." 

k  Ver.  21  —  Num.  xxi.  24  ;  "  Israel  smote  him." 


166 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


22  of,  1. 1  conquered]  all  the  land  of  the  Amorites,  the  inhabitants  of  that  country.  And 
they  possessed  [conquered]  all  the  coasts  [the  entire  territory]  of  the  Amorites,  from 
Arnon  even  unto  [the]  Jabbok,  and  from  the  wilderness  even  unto  [the]   Jordan. 

23  So  now  the  Lord  [Jehovah,  the]  God  of  Israel  hath  dispossessed  the  Amorites  from 
before  his  people  Israel,  and  shouldest  thou  possess   [dispossess]  2  it  [i.  «•  the  people 

24  Israel  ]  ?  Wilt  not  thou  possess  that  which  Chemosh  thy  god  giveth  thee  to  possess  ? 
So  whomsoever  [whatsoever]  the  Lord  [Jehovah]   our   God  shall  drive  out  from 

25  before  us  [shall  give  us  to  possess],  them  [that]  will  we  possess.  And  now  art 
thou  any  thing  better  than  Balak  the  son  of  Zippor  king  of  Moab  ?  did  he  ever  strive 

26  against  [litigate  with] 3  Israel,  or  did  he  ever  fight  against  them,  [?]  While  [Since] 
Israel  dwelt  in  Heshbon  and  her  towns  [daughter-cities],  and  in  Aroer  [Aror]  and 
her  towns  [daughter-cities],  and  in  all  the  cities  that  be  along  by  the  coasts  [banks] 
of  Arnon  [there  have  passed]  three  hundred  years  ?  [;]  why  therefore  did  ye  not  recover 

27  them  within  that  time  ?  Wherefore  I  have  not  sinned  against  thee,  but  thou  doest 
me  wrong  to  war  against  me :  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  the  Judge  be  judge  this  day  be 

28  tween  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  and  the  children  [sons]  of  Ammon.  Howbeit, 
the  king  of  the  children  [sons]  of  Ammon  hearkened  not  unto  the  words  of  Jeph- 
thah  which  he  sent  him. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

II  Ver.  13.  —  Dr.  Cassel  omits  rt  Because."  **3,  in  this  place,  may  be  either  the  sign  of  a  direct  quotation,  as  which  H 
would  be  sufficiently  indicated  by  a  colon  after  "  Jephthah  "  ;  or  a  causal  conjunction  (E.  V.,  De  Wette).  If  the  latter, 
the  sentence  is  elliptical :  "  We  have  much  to  do  with  each  other,"  or,  ,:  I  am  come  to  fight  against  thee,"  because,  etc.  — 
Tb-I 

[2  Ver.  23.  —  ilSUT^P,  lit.  "  seize  him."  "  The  construction  of  W^  with  the  accusative  of  the  people,'  say« 
Keil,  "arises  from  theTfact  that  in  order  to  seize  upon  a  land,  it  is  necessary  first  to  overpower  the  people  that  inhabits 
It."  '  Both  he  and  Bertheau,  however,  refer  the  suffix  to  "  the  Amorite,"  and  are  then  obliged  to  make  the  Amorite  stand 
for  the  "  land  of  the  Amorite."  — Te.] 

[3  Ver.  25.  — D>_)  to  contend  in  words,  to  plead  before  a  judge.  Dr.  Cassel  translates  by  rcchten,  to  litigate,  which 
must  here  of  course  be  taken  in  a  derivative  sense. —  Ta.] 


EXE8ETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  12.  The  peaceable  negotiations  into  which 
Jephthah,  before  he  proceeds  to  war,  enters  with 
Ammon,  demonstrate  —  and  the  less  successful 
such  efforts  usually  are,  the  more  characteristically 
—  the  truly  God-fearing  character  of  the  new  chief- 
tain. The  Ammonites  were  a  strong  and  valiant 
people  (cf.  Num.  xxi.;  Deut.  ii.  20,  21);  but  it 
was  not  on  this  account 'that  he  sought  to  negotiate 
with  them  once  more.  The  Ammonites  were  de- 
scended from  Lot,  the  nephew  of  Abraham  ;  and 
Israel,  on  their  journey  to  Canaan,  had  not  been 
allowed  to  assail  them  (Deut.  ii.  19).  Jephthah, 
before  he  draws  the  sword,  wishes  to  free  himself 
from  everv  liability  to  be  truthfully  charged  with 
the  violation  of  ancient  and  sacred  prescriptions. 
He  desires  to  have  a  clear,  divine  right  towar,  in 
case  Ammon  will  not  desist  from  its  hostile  pur- 
poses. He  hopes  for  victory,  not  through  strength 
of  arms,  but  through  the  righteousness  of  his  cause. 
This  he  would  secure ;  so  that  he  may  leave  it  to 
God  to  decide  between  the  parties. 

What  is  there  between  me  and  thee,  ^yTIO 
Tjbl.  A  proverbial  form  of  speech,  which  may 
serve  the  most  divergent  states  of  mind  to  express 
and  introduce  any  effort  to  repel  and  ward  off. 
While  it  might  here  be  rendered,  "  What  wilt 
thou  ''.  what  have  I  done  to  thee  1  "  in  the  mouth 
of  the  prophet  Elisha,  repelling  the  unholy  king 
(2  Kgs.  iii.  13),  it  means,  "  How  comest  thou  to 
me  !  I  know  thee  not  I"  and  in  that  of  the  woman 
whose  sorrow  for  the  loss  of  her  child   breaks  out 


afresh  when  she  sees  Elijah  (1  Kgs.  xvii.  18),  "  Ala* 
let  me  alone,  stay  away !  "  The  Gospel  translates 
it  by  ti  4/j.ol  Kal  o-oi :  in  which  form  it  appears  in 
the  celebrated  passage,  John  ii.  4,  where  Jesus 
speaks  to  .Mary.  But  it  has  there  not  the  haish 
sense,  "  What  have  I  to  do  with  thee !  "  (which  it 
has  not  even  here  in  the  message  of  Jephthah),  but 
only  expresses  a  hurried  request  for  silence,  for  his 
"  hour  was  not  yet  come." 

Ver.  13.  Israel  took  away  my  land.  For  a 
question  of  right,  Ammon,  like  other  robbers  and 
conquerors,  was  not  at  all  prepared ;  but  since  it 
is  put,  the  hostile  king  cannot  well  evade  it.  Rea- 
sons, however,  have  never  been  wanting  to  justify 
measures  of  violence.  Although  unacquainted 
with  the  arts  of  modern  state-craft,  ancient  nations, 
as  well  as  those  of  later  times,  understood  how  to 
base  the  demands  of  their  desires  on  historical 
wrongs.  .  Only,  such  claims,  when  preferred  by 
nations  like  the  Ammonites,  usually  did  not  wear 
even  the  appearance  of  truth.  The  king  of  Am- 
mon seeks  to  excuse  his  present  war  against  Israel, 
by  asserting  that  when  Israel  came  up  out  of 
Egypt  they  took  from  him  the  territory  between 
Arnon,  Jabbok,  and  Jordan,  about  coextensive 
with  the  inheritance  of  Reuben  and  Gad.  It  was 
utterly  untrue.  For  when  Israel  went  forth  out 
of  Egypt,  this  territory  was  in  the  hands  of  Sihon, 
king  of  the  Amorites,  who  ruled  in  Heshbon  (Num. 
xxi.).  This  king,  it  is  true,  had  obtained  it  by 
conquest ;  but  not  so  much  from  Ammon  as  from 
Moab,  even  though  some  connection  of  the  Am- 
monites with  the  conquered  lands  is  to  be  inferred 
from  Josh.  xiii.  25.     Israel  itself  had  fought  wilt 


CHAPTER  XI.   12- 


167 


neither  M  >ab  nor  Amnion,  taken  nothing  from 
them,  nor  even  crossed  their  borders. 

Jephthah  does  not  fail  to  reduce  this  false  pre- 
tense to  its  nothingness  ;  for  it  was  of  the  utmost 
importance  in  his  view  to  make  it  manifest  that  the 
war,  on  the  side  of  the  Ammonites,  was  thoroughly 
unjust.  The  memoir  which  he  sends  to  the  king 
of  Ammon,  is  as  clear  as  it  is  instructive.  It  shows 
the  existence  of  a  historical  consciousness  in  the 
Israel  of  that  day,  asserting  itself  as  soon  as  the 
people  became  converted  to  God.  For  only  a  be- 
lieving people  is  instructed  and  strengthened  by 
history.  Jephthah  unfolds  a  piece  of  the  history 
of  Israel  in  the  desert.  It  has  been  asked,  in  what 
relation  the  statements  here  made  stand  to  those 
contained  in  the  Pentateuch.  The  answer  is,  that 
the  message  of  Jephthah  makes  a  free  use  of  the 
statements  of  the  Pentateuch. 

Vers.  1 5-2S.  Thus  saith  Jephthah.  This  in- 
troduction to  ver.  15  already  indicates  the  free 
combination  by  Jephthah,  of  statements  derived 
from  the  ancient  records.  That  which  is  of  pecul- 
iar interest  in  this  document,  and  strongly  evinces 
its  originality,  is,  that  while  the  turns  of  the  lan- 
guage and  the  various  verbal  repetitions  (already 
pointed  out  in  the  text)  indicate  the  source  whence 
it  was  borrowed,  its  departures  from  that  source 
evidence  the  freedom  with  which  the  material  is 
used  for  the  end  in  view.  Nothing  is  said  which 
is  not  contained  in  the  Pentateuch ;  only  a  few 
facts,  of  present  pertinence,  are  brought  forward 
and  freely  emphasized.  Bertheau  is  inaccurate, 
when  he  thinks  that  the  statement  in  ver.  17,  con- 
cerning Israel's  sending  to  Moab  to  ask  for  passage 
through  their  land  and  Moab's  refusal,  is  alto- 
gether new.  For  in  the  first  place  the  perfect 
equality  of  Edom  and  Moab  as  regards  the  policy 
pursued  towards  them  by  Moses,  is  already  inti- 
mated in  Deut.  ii.  9  ;  and  in  the  next  place,  ver. 
29  of  the  same  chapter  makes  Moses  request  Sihon 
to  give  a  passage  to  Israel  through  his  land,  and 
that  he  will  not  do  "  as  the  sons  of  Esan  and  the 
Moabites  did,"  to  wit,  deny  them.  That  which 
connects  ver.  29  with  ver.  28  (Deut.  ii.),  is  not 
that  Esau  and  Moab  had  granted  what  Moses  now 
requests  of  Sihon,  but  that  they  had  not  allowed 
his  petition,  by  reason  of  which  he  is  compelled  to 
demand  it  of  Sihon.1  Here,  therefore,  it  is  plainly 
intimated,  that  Moab  also  refused  a  passage.  This 
fact,  Jephthah  clothes  in  his  own  language,  and 
weaves  into  his  exact  narrative  with  the  selfsame 
design  with  which  Moses  alluded  to  it  in  the  pas- 
sage already  quoted,  namely,  to  prove  that  Israel 
was  compelled  by  necessity  to  take  its  way  through 

1  [This  interpretation  of  Deut.  ii.  29,  which  would  clear 
It  of  all  appearance  of  conflict  with  Num.  xx.  14-20,  is  un- 
fortunately not  supported  by  the  language  of  the  original. 
The  natural  rendering  of  the  text  is  substantially  that  of 
the  E.  V.  :  ''  Thou  shalt  sell  me  food  for  money,  that  I  may 
eat  ;  and  thou  shalt  give  me  water  for  money,  that  I  may 
irink ;  only  I  will  pass  through  on  my  feet:  as  did  uato 
ne  the  sons  of  Esau  who  dwell  in  Seir,  and  the  Moabites 
who  dwell  in  Ar:  until  I  pass  over  Jordan,  into  the  land 
which  Jehovah  our  God  giveth  us.'-  The  reader's  first 
thought  is,  that  the  conduct 'of  Edom  and  Moab  is  referred 
to  as  a  precedent  covering  both  parts  of  the  present  request 
to  Sihon  :  r'  Sell  me  food  and  grant  me  a  passage  —  as  Edom 
And  Moab  did,  so  do  thou."  But  history  relates  that 
Bdom  denied  a  passage,  and  that  Israel  made  a  detour 
iround  the  Edomite  territories.  May  we  then  regard  the 
precedent  as  referring  only  to  the  matter  of  supplies  ?  and 
the  clause  which  recalls  it  to  the  memory  of  Sihon,  as  occu- 
py ag  a  place  after  that  which  a  logical  arrangement  of  the 
clauses  would  assign  it  ?  This  supposition,  by  no  means 
anlikely  in  itself,  seem*   to  be  favored  by  the  construction 


the  land  of  the  Amorite.  The  same  tracing  of 
events  to  their  causes,  leads  Jephthah  in  ver.  20  to 
say  of  Sihon  :  "  he  trusted  not  Israel,"  whereas 
Num.  xxi.  23  merely  says  :  "he  permitted  not." 
Jephthah  seeks  to  give  additional  emphasis  to  the 
tact,  that  if  Sihon  lost  his  land,  the  fault  lay  not 
with  Israel.  Sihon  could  not  but  see  that  no 
other  passage  remained  tor  Israel ;  but  he  refused 
to  credit  the  peaceable  words  of  Moses.  His  dis- 
tru-t  was  his  ruin.  Further:  instead  of  the  ex- 
pression, "  until  I  pass  over  Jordan,  into  the  land 
which  Jehovah  our  God  giveth  us  "  (Deut.  ii.  29) 
Jephthah  writes,  "  let  us  pass  through  thy  land  (t, 
my  place."  At  that  time,  he  means  to  say,  the 
Canaan  this  side  the  Jordan  was  Israel's  destina- 
tion;  for  not  till  after  that  —  and  this  is  why  he 
changes  the  phraseology  —  did  God  give  us  Canaan 
beyond  the  Jordan  also.  For  the  same  reason  he 
substitutes  "  Israel  "  for  "Moses"  in  the  expres- 
sion, "  And  Moses  sent  messengers"  (Num.  xx. 
14).  Over  against  Ammon,  he  brings  Israel  into 
view  as  a  national  personality. 

On  the  basis  of  this  historical  review,  Jephthah 
in  a  few  sentences  places  the  unrighteousness  of 
his  demands  before  the  king  of  Ammon.  What, 
therefore,  Jehovah  our  God  allowed  us  to  conquer 
—  that  thou  wilt  possess?  thou,  who  hadst  no 
claims  to  it  at  any  time,  since,  properly  speaking, 
it  was  never  thine?  If  any  party  could  maintain 
a  claim,  it  was  Moab;  but  Balak,  the  king  of 
Moab,  never  raised  it,  nor  did  he  make  war  on 
that  account.  The  conquest,  by  virtue  of  which 
Israel  held  the  land,  was  not  the  result  of  wrongful 
violence,  but  of  a  war  rashly  induced  by  the  enemy 
himself.  God  gave  the  victory  and  the  land.  A 
more  solid  title  than  that  which  secures  to  Israel 
the  country  between  the  Arnon  and  the  Jabbok, 
there  cannot  be.  Or  has  Ammon  a  better  for  his 
own  possession  ?  Were  they  not  taken  by  force 
of  arms  from  the  Zamzummim  ( Deut.  ii.  21 ) !  or,  as 
Jephthah  expresses  it,  "  were  they  not  given  thee 
by  Chemosh,  thy  god  i "  He  makes  use  of  Am- 
nion's own  form  of  thought  and  expression.  Che- 
mosh (the  desolater,  from  2*^3  =  ITS'?)  is  the 
God  of  War.  As  such,  he  can  here  represent  the 
god  of  Amnion,  although  usually  regarded  as  the 
Moabitish  deity ;  for  it  is  the  martial  method  in 
which  Ammon  obtained  his  land  on  which  the 
stress  is  laid.  Chemosh  is  war  personified,  hence 
especially  honored  by  the  Moabites,  whose  Ar  Moab, 
the  later  Areopolis,  is  evidently  related  to  the 
Greek  Ares  -  ( Mars) .  Hence  also  the  represen- 
tation of  him  on  extant  specimens  of  ancient  Are- 

of  the  sentence.  It  does  not,  however,  relieve  the  passage 
of  all  difficulty.  For  it  still  leaves  the  implication  that 
Edom  and  Moab  sold  food  and  water  to  Israel,  whereas  ac- 
cording to  Num.  xx.  20  they  refused  to  do  that  also.  Keil 
therefore  argues  that  this  refusal  was  made  when  Israel  was 
on  the  western  boundary  of  Edom,  where  the  oharacter  of 
the  mountains  made  it  easy  to  repulse  an  army  ;  but  that 
when  Israel  had  reached  their  eastern  boundary,  where  the 
mountains  sink  down  into  vast  elevated  plains,  and  pre 
sent  no  difficulty  to  an  invading  army,  the  Edomites  took 
counsel  of  prudence,  and  instead  of  offering  hostilities  to 
the  Israelites,  contented  themselves  with  the  profitable  sale 
of  what  would  otherwise  have  been  taken  by  force.  This 
is  at  least  a  plausible  explanation,  although  not  founded 
on  historical  evidence,  unless,  what  is  by  no  means  improb- 
able, Deut.  ii.  2-9  is  designed  to  explain  the  course  of  nc- 
tuat  events  by  a  statement  of  divine  instructions.  —  Tr.] 

•i  Hence,  the  name  Aroer  proves  also  that  the  worship  o, 
the  ''  War-god  "  obtained  in  Ammon  as  well  as  in  Moab. 
For  a  city  of  that  name  existed  in  the  territories  of  each  of 
these  nations. 


168 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


opolitan  coins,  where  he  appears  with  a  sword  in 
Jus  right,  and  a  lance  and  shield  in  his.left  hand,  with 
torches  on  either  side  (Eckhel,  Doctr.  Nummor,  iii. 
394  ;   .Movers,  Phonizier,i.  334). 

Jejihthah  is  sincere  in  this  reference  to  the  title 
by  which  Ammon  holds  his  land.  He  does  not 
dispute  a  claim  grounded  on  ancient  conquest.  For 
in  Deut.  ii.  21,  also,  it  is  remarked,  from  a  purely 
Israelitish  point  of  view,  that  "Jehovah  gave  the 
land  to  the  sons  of  Ammon  for  a  possession." 
Quite  rightly  too;  inasmuch  as  Jehovah  is  the! 
God  of  all  nations.  But  as  Jephthah  desires  to 
6peak  intelligibly  and  forcibly  to  Ammon,  who 
does  not  understand  the  world-wide  government 
of  Jehovah,  he  connects  the  same  sentiment  with 
the  name  of  Chemosh,  to  whom  Ammon  traces 
back  his  warlike  deeds  and  claims.1  He  thereby 
points  out,  in  the  most  striking  and  conclusive 
manner,  that  if  Ammon  refuses  to  recognize  the 
rights  of  Israel  to  its  territory,  he  at  the  same . 
time  undermines,  in  principle,  his  own  right  to  the  [ 
country  he  inhabits.  Aside  from  this,  300  years  | 
have  passed  since  Israel  first  dwelt  in  Heshbon, 
Aroer,  and  on  the  banks  of  the  Arnon.  The  state- 
ment exhibits  a  fine  geographical  arrangement :  j 
Heshbon,  as  capital  of  the  ancient  kingdom,  is  put . 
first ;  then,  to  the  north  of  it,  Aroer  (or  Aror,  prob- ' 
ably  so  called  to  distinguish  it  from  the  southern 
Aroer)  in  Gad,  over  against  the  capital  of  Ammon  ; 
and  finally,  in  the  south,  the  cities  on  the  Arnon. 
Possession,  so  long  undisputed,  cannot  now  be 
called  in  question.  Jephthah  concludes,  therefore, 
that  on  his  side  no  wrong  had  been  committed ; 
but  Ammon  seeks  a  quarrel  —  may  God  decide  be- 
tween them!  But  Ammon  hearkened  not  —  a 
proof  how  little  the  best  and  most  righteous  state 
papers  avail,  when  men  are  destitute  of  good  in- 
tentions. On  the  other  hand,  let  this  exposition 
of  Jephthah  be  a  model  for  all  litigating  nations, 
and  teach  them  not  only  to  claim,  but  truly  to 
have,  right  and  justice  on  their  side.  For  God, 
the  judge,  is  witness  and  hearer  for  all. 


HOMJLETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

[I'.  H.  S. :  Jephthah  as  Diplomatist  —  a  noble 
model  for  modern  imitation.  His  document  is,  1. 
Straightforward   and  convincing   by  its    truthful- 

i  [Wordsworth  :  l  It  does  not  6eem  that  Jephthah  is 
here  usiog  the  language  of  insult  to  the  Ammonites,  but  is 
giving  them  a  courteous  reply.  He  appears  to  recognize 
Chemosh  as  a  local  deity  ;  and  he  speaks  of  the  Lord  as  the 


ness;  2.  Firm  in  its  maintenance  of  righteous 
claims  ;  yet,  withal,  3.  Winning  and  conciliating 
in  its  tone.  —  The  most  upright  diplomacy  ma\ 
fail  to  avert  war;  but  it  is  nevertheless  powerful 
for  the  right.  Israel  doubtless  fought  better,  and 
with  higher  feelings,  when  it  saw  the  righteousness 
of  its  cause  so  nobly  set  forth  ;  while  the  enemy 
must  have  been  proportionably  depressed  by  con- 
victions of  an  opposite  character.  —  Jephthah's  di- 
plomacy as  contrasted  with  that  of  the  king  of 
Moab.  Alas,  that  representatives  of  Christian 
nations  should  so  often  imitate  the  heathen  king 
rather  than  the  Hebrew  Judge,  and  that  Christian 
nations  should  uphold  them  in  it ! 

Henry  :  Jephthah  did  not  delight  in  war, 
though  a  mighty  man  of  valor,  but  was  willing  to 
prevent  it  by  a  peaceable  accommodation.  War 
should  be  the  last  remedy,  not  to  be  used  till  all 
other  methods  of  ending  matters  in  variance  have 
been  tried  in  vain.  This  rule  should  also  be  ob- 
served in  going  to  law.  The  sword  of  justice,  as 
the  sword  of  war,  must  not  be  appealed  to  till  the 
contending  parties  have  first  endeavored  by  gentler 
means  to  understand  one  another,  and  to  accom- 
modate matters  in  variance  (1  Cor.  vi.  1).  —  The 
same  :  (on  vers.  17,  IS) :  Those  that  conduct  them- 
selves inoffensively,  may  take  the  comfort  of  it,  and 
plead  it  against  those  that  charge  them  with  in- 
justice and  wrong.  Our  righteousness  will  answer 
for  us  in  time  to  come,  and  will  "  put  to  silence  the 
ignorance  of  foolish  men."  —  The  same  :  One  in- 
stance of  the  honor  and  respect  we  owe  to  God.  as 
our  God,  is.  rightly  to  possess  that  which  He  gives 
us  to  possess,  receive  it  from  Him,  use  it  for  Him, 
keep  it  for  his  sake,  and  part  with  it  when  He  calls 
for  it.  —  The  same  :  (on  vers.  27,  28) :  War  is  an 
appeal  to  heaven,  to  God  the  Judge  of  all,  to  whom 
the  issues  of  it  belong.  If  doubtful  rights  be  dis- 
puted. He  is  thereby  requested  to  determine  them  ;  if 
manifest  rights  be  invaded  or  denied,  He  is  thereby 
applied  to  to  vindicate  what  is  just,  and  punish  .vhat 
is  wrong.  As  the  sword  of  justice  was  made  for 
lawless  and  disobedient  persons  (1  Tim.  i.  9).  so 
was  the  sword  of  war  for  lawless  and  disobedient 
princes  and  nations.  In  war,  therefore,  the  eye 
must  be  ever  up  to  God;  and  it  must  always  lie 
thought  a  dangerous  thing  to  desire  or  expect  that 
God  should  patronize  unrighteousness.  —  Tr.J 

God  of  Israel,  and  as  our  God  ;  and  calls  Israel  nis  //rw/»e 
He  regards  Him  [speaks  of  Him  ?]  as  a  national  deity,  bu 
does  not  claim  universal  dominion  for  Him-  '  —  Tr  j 


Jephthah  proceeds  to  the   conflict.     He  vows  a  vow  unto  Jehovah. 
Chapter    XI.  29-33. 


29 


30 


*1 


Then  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  came  upon  Jephthah,  and  he  passed  over 
[through]  Gilead,  and  [namely,]  Manasseh,  and  passed  over  [through]  Mizpeh  of 
Gilead  [Mizpeh-Gilead],  and  from  Mizpeh  of  Gilead  [Mizpeh-Gilead]  he  passed 
over  unto  [against]  the  children  [sons]  of  Ammon.  And  Jephthah  vowed  a  vow 
unto  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  and  said,  If  thou  shalt  without  fail '  deliver  the  children 
sons]  of  Ammon  into  mine  hands.  Then  it  shall  be,  that  whatsoever  conieth  forth 
out]  of  the  doors  of  my  house  to  meet  me.  when  I  return  in  peace  from  the  chil- 
dren fsons]  of  Ammon,  shall  surely  be  the   Lord's   [Jehovah's],  and  I  will   offer  i/ 


32 


33 


CHAPTER   XI.    29-33. 


1(!9 


up  for  a  burnt-offering.  So  [And]  Jephthah  passed  over  unto  the  children  [sons" 
of  Ammon  to  fight  against  them  :  and  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  delivered  them  into  his 
hands.  And  he  smote  them  from  Aroer  even  till  thou  come  to  Minnith,  even 
twenty  cities,  and  unto  the  plain  of  the  vineyards  [unto  Abel  Keramim],  with  a 
very  great  slaughter.  Thus  the  children  [sons]  of  Ammon  were  subdued  before 
the  children  [sons]  of  Israel. 


TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  30.  —  It  would  be  better,  perhaps,  with  Dr.  Cassel  to  omit  the  words  "  without  fail."  The  Hebrew  infinitive 
before  the  finite  verb  serves  to  intensify  the  latter  ;  but  the  endeavor  to  give  its  value  in  a  translation,  is  very  apt  to  re 
lult  in  the  suggestion  of  thoughts  or  shades  of  thought  foreign  to  the  original.     Cf.  Ges.   Gram.  131,  3,  a.  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  29,  33.  Noble  words  are  followed  by 
splendid  deeds.  It  is,  however,  no  easy  matter  to 
determine  the  geographical  arena  in  which  the  his- 
tory of  Jephthah  is  enacted.  The  sons  of  Israel, 
according  to  ch.  x.  17,  assembled  themselves  in 
Mizpah.  To  Mizpah  also,  Jephthah  is  brought 
from  the  land  of  Tob :  and  there  he  utters  his 
words  before  Jehovah  (ch.  xi.  11).  This  Mizpah 
cannot  be  identical  with  Mizpeh-Gilead  ;  for,  ac- 
cording to  ver.  29,  Jephthah  "  proceeded —  namely, 
from  Mizpah  —  through  Gilead,  even  through  that 
part  of  it  which  belonged  to  Manasseh,  thence  to 
Mizpeh-Gilead,  and  from  Mizpeh-Gilead  against 
the  sons  of  Ammon."  The  position  of  Mrzpeh- 
Gilead  may  be  probably  determined.  According 
to  Josh.  xiii.  26,  there  was  in  the  territory  of  Gad 
a  place  called  Ramath  ha-Mizpeh.  This  place,  the 
same  doubtless  which  is  elsewhere  called  Ramoth- 
Gilead  (1  Kgs.  iv.  13)  and  Ramoth  in  Gilead  (Josh. 
xxi.  38),  a  possession  of  the  Levites,  and  dis- 
tinguished as  a  city  of  refuge  (Josh.  xxi.  8  if.),  is 
with  great  probability  referred  to  the  site  of  the 
present  es-Salt,  in  modern  times  the  only  important 
place  south  of  the  Jabbok,  the  central  point  of  the 
Belka,  and  meeting-place  of  all  its  roads  ( Bitter, 
xv.  1 1 22).  Being  built  around  the  sides  of  a  steep 
hill,  which  is  still  crowned  with  a  castle,  this  place 
answers  very  well  to  a  city  bearing  the  name  Ra- 
moth (Height).  It  is  still  a  place  of  refuge;  and, 
as  Seetzen  relates,  those  who  flee  thither,  are,  ac- 
cording to  ancient  custom,  protected  by  the  inhab- 
itants, even  at  the  risk  of  their  own  lives.  Now, 
as  Ramoth  ha-Mizpeh  may  be  compared  with  es- 
Salt,  so  Mizpeh  or  ha-Mizpeh  Gilead  with  what  in 
modern  times  is  called  el-Belka.1  If  this  be  al- 
lowed, the  point  of  departure  of  Jephthah's  course 
of  victory  is  plain.  From  Mizpeh-Gilead  he  pressed 
forward  against  the  enemy,  and  smote  him  "  from 
Aroer"  (ver.  33).  Now,  according  to  Josh.  xiii. 
25,  Aroer  lay  over  against  Rabbath  Ammon  (at 
present  Amman),  the  capital  of  the  Ammonites, 
and  its  position  may  therefore  not  improperly  be 
compared  with  that  of  the  modern  Aireh.  The 
places  "  unto  "  which  Jephthah  smote  the  enemy, 
Minnith  and  Abel  Keramim,  can  scarcely  be  dis- 
covered. They  only  indicate  the  wealth  and  cul- 
tivation of  the  now  desolate  land.     Minnith  sup- 

1  [El-Belka  is  a  modern  division  of  the  east-jordanic  ter- 
ritory, and  is  bounded  by  Wady  Zerka  (the  Jabbok)  on  the 
north,  and  by  Wady  Mojeb  (the  Arnon)  on  the  south.  It 
is  evident,  therefore,  that  our  author  regards  Mizpeh-Gilead 
is  the  name  of  a  district,  not  of  a  city.  The  reasoning  from 
'he  identification  of  Ramoth-Mizpeh  with  es-Salt  to  that  of 
Mizpeh-Gilead  with  el-Belka,  is  not  80  clear,  but  seems  to 
je  this  :  Since  Ramoth-Mizpeh  is  also  called  Ramoth-Gilead 
•nd  Ramoth  in  Gilead,  it  is  to  be  inferred  that  Mizpeh,  like 
Silead,  indicates  the  district  in  which  Ramath  is  situated, 
rith  this  difference,  however,  that  Mizpeh  is   more  definite, 


plied  Tyre  with  wheat  (Ezek.  xxvii.  17).  As  to 
Abel  Keramim  (Meadow  of  Vineyards),  it  implies 
the  vicinity  of  the  Ammonitish  capital,  whose 
ruins,  and  also  many  of  its  coins,  still  exhibit  the 
grape-bunch  prominent  among  their  ornaments 
(Ritter,  xv.  1152,  1157).  But  with  all  this,  Miz- 
pah, whence  Jephthah  and  his  men  set  out  to  go 
to  es-Salt  and  Aireh,  pursuing  their  march  through 
Gilead,  more  definitely,  through  the  Gilead  of 
Manasseh,  north  of  the  Jabbok,  remains  yet  unde- 
termined. Although  it  does  not  occur  again,  it 
must  yet  have  been  a  place  of  some  importance. 
Inasmuch  as  it  has  a  name  which  characterizes  its 
situation  only  in  a  general  way,  it  may  in  later 
times  have  bome  a  different  one.  It  seems  to  agree 
most  nearly  with  what  in  Josh.  xi.  3  is  called  the 
"  land  of  Mizpeh,"  —  "  the  Hivite  under  Hermon 
in  the  land  of  Mizpeh."  For,  as  is  also  stated  1 
Chr.  v.  23,  "  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh  dwelt  in 
the  land  of  Bashan,  as  far  as  Baal-Hermon,  and 
Senir,  and  Mt.  Hermon."  Now,  the  Bella  of  later 
times,  so  named  on  account  of  the  similarity  of  its 
situation  to  the  Macedonian  city  of  the  same  name 
—  it  lay  on  a  height,  surrounded  by  water  —  is 
said  formerly  to  have  been  called  Buds,  still  in 
agreement  with  the  Macedonian  city,  which  lay  in 
the  district  Bottiaeis.  A  similarity  of  sound  be- 
tween the  name  Butis  and  Mizpah  could  only  then 
be  found,  if  it  might  be  assumed  that  as  Timnah 
was  also  called  Timnatah,  so  Mizpah  had  also 
been  called  Mizpatah.  It  would  at  all  events  be 
worth  while  to  fix,  even  conjecturally,  upon  the 
place  where  the  great  hero  prepared  himself  for  his 
victory.  As  he  enters  on  the  conflict,  the  Spirit 
of  Jehovah  rests  upon  him.  He  has  given  the  de- 
cision into  Jehovah's  hands ;  he  looks  to  Him  for 
victory  ;  and  to  Him  he  makes  a  vow. 

Vers.  30-32.  This  vow  has  been  the  subject  ol 
the  most  singular  misapprehensions;  and  yet, 
rightly  understood,  it  crowns  the  deep  piety  of 
this  hero  of  God.  Jephthah  perceives  the  full 
significance  of  the  course  on  which  he  decides. 
He  knows  how  greatly  victory  will  strengthen 
faith  in  God  throughout  all  the  tribes.  He  sees  a 
new  Israel  rise  up.  The  people  have  trustingly 
committed  themselves  to  his  leadership,  and  he  has 
uttered  all  his  "  words  before  Jehovah."  In  this 
state  of  mind,  he  bows  himself  before  his  God  (1 
Sam.  i.  28),  and  makes  a  vow.'-     To  the  national 

being  only  a  division  of  Gilead.  But  Ramoth  may  be  identified 
with  es-Salt  in  the  Belka  :  hence  the  ancipnt  district  Mizpeh 
may  be  compared  with  the  modern  province  el-Belka.  —  Tr.] 
2  For  the  history  of  the  exegesis,  and  its  characteristic 
points,  I  refer  to  my  article  "Jephthah. '"  in  Herzog's  Real- 
Eneyklopddie,  the  materials  of  which  cannot  here  be  repro- 
duced, but  the  drift  of  which  is  here.  I  trust,  provided  with 
fresh  support.  The  other  recent  literature  on  the  subject  is 
indicated  by  Keil,  who  justly  explains  that  the  assuuiption 
of  a  spiritual  sacrifice  is  almost  imperatively  demanded.  The 
opinions  of  the  church   fathers   are  collected  in  the  Coi> 


LTO 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


spirit  which  expresses  itself  in  the  Bible,  tows  are 
the  signs  and  expression  of  the  deepest  self-sur- 
render to  God.  Jacob  makes  vows  to  be  fulfilled 
ju  his  prosperous  return  home  (Gen.  xxviii.  20  ff.). 
Iii  the  Psalms,  "  to  pay  one's  vows,"  has  become 
synonymous  with  "  to  live  in  God"  (Ps.  lxi.  8; 
oxvi.  16  ff.).  The  prophet  describes  the  coming 
salvation  of  the  nations  by  saying  that  they  shall 
"  make  vows  and  perform  them  "  (Isa.  xix.  21). 
And  this  idea  is  deeply  grounded  in  truth:  for  in 
the  vows  which  man  makes  to  God,  there  is  evi- 
dently expressed  a  living  faith  in  the  divine  om- 
nipotence and  omniscience.  Man  expects  from 
Him,  and  would  fain  give  to  Him.  The  more  one 
feels  himself  to  have  received  from  God,  the  more 
will  he  desire  to  consecrate  to  Him.  Such  is  the 
feeling  under  which  Jephthah  makes  his  vow  to 
Jehovah.  He  promises  that  if  God  grant  him 
victory,  and  he  return  home  crowned  with  success, 
'  then  that  which  goeth  forth  from  the  doors 
of  my  house  to  meet  me,  shall  be  Jehovah's, 
and  I  will  present  it  as  a  whole  burnt-offer- 
ing." He  makes  this  vow  from  the  fullness  of  his 
conviction  that  victory  belongs  to  God  alone,  and 
from  the  fullness  of  his  love,  which  would  give  to 
God  that  which  belongs  to  Him  as  the  author  of 
success.  He  would  make  it  known  to  God,  that 
he  regards  Him,  and  not  himself,  as  the  command- 
er-in-chief. There  exists,  therefore,  a  profound 
connection  between  the  words,  "  when  I  return  in 
peace  from  the  sons  of  Ammon,"  and  the  expres- 
sion, "  whatsoever  cometh  forth  to  meet  me ;  "  and 
it  is  essential  to  the  right  understanding  of  the 
vow  that  this  be  borne  in  mind.  Victory  will 
awaken  great  rejoicings  among  the  people.  They 
will  meet  the  returning  victor  with  loud  acclama- 
tions of  gladness.  They  will  receive  him  with  gifts 
and  adornments,  with  garlands  and  dances.  Such 
receptions  were  customary  among  all  nations. 
The  multitude  scattered  roses,  myrtles,1  and  per- 
fumes. Similar  customs  obtained  in  Israel  ( 1  Sam. 
xviii.  6).  Jephthah  will  be  celebrated  and  praised. 
But  not  to  him  —  to  God,  belongs  the  honor! 
That  which  is  consecrated  to  him,  belongs,  wholly 
and  entirely,  to  God.  This  is  the  first  ground  of  his 
vow.  Jephthah's  overflowing  heart  knows  not 
what  to  consecrate.  He  feels  that  nothing  is  suf- 
ficient to  be  presented  to  God.  But  all  things  are 
subject  to  God's  disposal.  Therefore,  whatever 
comes  forth  over  the  threshold  of  his  house  to 
meet  him,  when  he  returns  victorious,  —  it  shall 
be  for  God.  He  will  have  no  part  in  it.  By  this 
first  ground  of  the  vow,  its  analogy  with  heathen 
narratives  is  so  far  limited,  that  there  is  here  no 
talk  of  a  sacrifice  to  consist  of  just  the  first  -  whom 
he  meets,  and  the  first  alone.     Nor  is  it  necessary 

to  assume  that  N3£  "!#£  HS'Vn,  "  that  which 
goeth  forth,"  must  be  understood  to  mean  only  one 
person.  It  is  as  little  necessary  as  that  in  Num. 
xxx.  3  (2),  where  vows  are  treated  of,  the  words 

nieutary  of  Serarius.  Bertheau's  decision  for  an  actual 
sacrificial  death,  may  probably  be  explained  by  the  supposi- 
tion that  he  did  not  view  the  transaction  freely  and  inde- 
pendently, but  only  with  reference  to  the  opinions  of  others, 
a  proceeding  of  too  frequent  occurrence. 

1  Ct.  Gerhard,  Amerlesem  griecn.  YiisengemdWe^  i.  130, 
186. 

'2   Which  is  the  decisive  point   in  the  legends  concerning 

us,   aB  told   by  Servius,  and  Alexander,  as  related 

by  Valerius  Maximus  (vii.  3  ;  cf.  my  article  in  Herzog,  vi. 
172).  This  also  is  the  turning  point  in  a  series  of  later,  es- 
pecially Herman,  popular  tales,  in  which  the  tf  first"  is  not 
so  muoh  freely  promised  to,  as  demanded  by,  the  demon 
power  who,  for    that  price,  has  supported   or   delivered  the 


VQp  NSVH,  "  that  which  proceedeth  out  of  hit 
mouth,"  must  mean  one  word.  The  participle  is  in 
the  singular  on  account  of  its  neutral  signification. 
This  indefiniteness  is  the  peculiar  characteristic  of 
the  votive  formula.  Equally  indefinite  is  the  mean- 
ing of  the  verb  SH^  ("goeth  forth"),  which  may  be 

used  of  persons  and  things,  men  and  animals  (cf. 
Gen.ix.  10).  But  the  occasion  of  the  vow  shows  also 
that  Jephthah  must  have  thought  of  persons  as  com- 
ing forth  to  meet  him.  At  all  events,  he  cannot  have 
thought  that  precisely  a  lamb  or  an  ox  would  come 
forth  from  his  doors  to  meet  him.  Notwithstanding 
the  breadth  of  the  vow,  notwithstanding  all  its  indefi- 
niteness, which  is  left,  as  it  were,  to  be  tilled  out 
by  God  himself,  the  chieftain  must  have  thought 
of  persons  coming  to  meet  him  ;  for  they  come  forth 
on  account  of  the  victory,  and  for  that  reason  may 
be  given  to  God  who  gives  the  triumph.  Doubt- 
less, the  abundance  of  his  love  is  as  boundless  as 
that  of  his  faith.  As  little  as  he  analyzes  the  let- 
ter, by  which  God's  victorious  might  enters  his 
heart,  so  little  does  his  vow  separate  and  individ- 
ualize the  objects  of  the  former.  He  calculates  not 
—  raises  no  difficulties :  whatever  comes  to  meet 
him,  that  he  will  give  to  God.  But  as  surely  as 
this  does  not  include  things  beyond  the  range  of 
possible  contingencies,  so  surely  must  he  have  had 
some  thoughts  as  to  who  might  meet  him  on  a  vic- 
torious return  home.  And  if  he  was  aware  that 
not  only  oxen  and  lambs  might  come  out  to  meet 
him  —  for  such  a  limitation  would  contradict  the 
breadth  of  the  vow  itself —  he  was  equally  aware 
that  not  everything  which  might  come  forth,  could 
be  offered  up  like  oxen  and  lambs. 

Due  stress  being  laid  on  the  fact  that  the  meet- 
ing is  contemplated  as  one  taking  place  in  conse- 
quence of  victory,  there  is  suggested,  for  the  fur- 
ther understanding  of  the  vow,  a  second  point  of 
view,  not  yet  properly  considered.  Jephthah's  war 
is  a  national  war  against  Ammon.  The  freedom 
and  rights,  which  Israel  had  received  from  Jeho- 
vah, are  thereby  vindicated.  The  negotiations 
about  the  claims  to  certain  lands,  set  up  by  Ammon, 
and  refuted  by  Jephthah.  have  not  been  related  in 
vain.  They  exhibit  the  God  of  Israel  in  his  abso- 
lute greatness,  over  against  Chemosh,  the  false  de- 
ity of  the  Ammonites.  Israel  has  repented  ;  and 
it  is  not  one  man,  but  the  whole  tribe,  that  is  rep- 
resented as  beseeching  Jehovah  for  help.  To  bring 
out  this  contrast  between  Jehovah  and  the  gods  of 
the  heathen,  the  history  of  Israel,  which  rests  on 
the  power  and  will  of  Jehovah,  is  referred  to  in  a 
free  and  living  way.  Jephthah  is  conversant  with 
the  divine  record.  He  calls  on  Jehovah  to  decide 
as  judge  between  himself  and  Ammon  (ver.  27), 
just  as  in  his  dealings  with  the  Gileadites  he  ap- 
peals to  Him  as  "  Hearer  "  (ver.  11).  He  utters  his 
words  "  before  Jehovah,"  and  the  "  Spirit  of  Je- 
hovah "  comes  upon  him.     The  name  "  Elohim  " 

person  from  whom  the  sacrifice  is  required.  This  tf  first  " 
ia  usually  the  person  most  beloved  by  him  who,  to  his  great 
regret,  has  made  the  promise  (cf.  Mulleuhoff,  Sagen,  pp.  384, 
386.  395;  Sommer,  Sagen,  pp.  87,  131).  Sometimes,  the 
"  first  human  being  ''  is  successfully  rescued  from  the  devil 
—  for  it  is  he  who  appears  in  Christian  legends — by  the 
substitution  of  au  anima,.  In  one  of  MiillenhttTs  legends 
(p.  162,  Anmerk.)  a  dog  becomes  the  ''first  ;  "  in  Grimm's 
Mylkologie,  p.  973  (cf.  Wolf,  Deutsche  Sagen,  p.  417,  etc.), 
it  is  a  goat.  No  doubt,  a  mistaken  exposition  of  Jephthah 'I 
vow,  had  its  intiueuce  here.  It  is,  therefore,  the  more  im- 
portant to  insist  that  in  the  vow  nothing  is  said  of  ft  firm 
one  who  may  meet  the  returning  conqueror. 


CHAPTER   XL   39-38. 


171 


j  not  used,  —  for  that  Amnion  considers  applicable 
to  kis  gods  also,  —  but  always  that  name  which  in- 
rolves  the  distinctive  faith  of  Israel,  namely,  Je- 
hovah. All  through,  Jephthah  is  represented  as 
Familiar  with  the  Mosaic  institutes,  and  imbued 
with  their  spirit;  and  this  just  because  the  his- 
tory deals  with  a  national  war  against  Amnion. 
The  vow  also,  which  Jephthah  makes,  is  modeled 
by  this  contrast  between  Israel  and  Amnion.  The 
tribes  descended  from  Lot  are  especially  notorious 
for  the  nature  of  their  idolatrous  worship.  The 
abominations  practiced  by  Amnion  and  Moab  in 
honor  of  Milcom  (as  they  called  Molech)  and 
Chemosh,  are  sufficiently  familiar  from  the  history 
of  Israel  under  the  kings  (1  Kgs.  xi.  7,  etc.).  The 
sacrifice  of  human  beings,  particularly  children, 
formed  a  terrible  part  of  their  worship.  They 
burned  and  slaughtered  those  whom  they  loved,  in 
token  of  devotion  and  surrender  to  the  dreaded  de- 
mon. The  same  practices  were  generally  diffused 
among  the  Phoenicians  (cf.  Movers,  i.  302).  On 
great  national  occasions,  such  as  war  or  pestilence, 
parents  vowed  to  sacrifice  their  children  on  the 
public  altars.  In  the  Second  Book  of  Kings 
jeh.  iii.  27)  we  have  the  horrible  story  of  the  king 
of  Moab,  who  slaughtered  his  eldest  son  on  the 
walls  of  his  city.  Without  entering  farther  into 
this  terrible  superstition,  the  explanation  of  which 
by  Movers  is  not  exhaustive,  thus  much  it  is  nec- 
essary to  say  here  :  that  the  sacrifices  it  required 
were  regarded  by  the  nations  who  offered  them,  as 
the  highest  expression  of  their  self-surrender  to  the 
idol-god.  Hence,  it  is  only  upon  the  background 
of  tliis  practice,  that  the  offering  of  Isaac  by  Abra- 
ham can  be  rightly  understood.  Abraham  is  put 
to  the  proof,  whether  he  will  show  the  same  free 
and  obedient  self-surrender.  As  soon  as  he  has 
dune  that,  it  is  made  clear  that  such  sacrifices  God 
does  not  desire. 

A  similar  contrast  is  unquestionably  exhibited 
in  the  vow  of  Jephthah  ;  only,  here  the  reference 
is  specially  to  Amnion.  Jephthah  appears  before 
Jehovah  with  devotion  and  readiness  to  make  sac- 
rifices not  inferior  to  that  of  which  idolaters  boast 
themselves.  He  promises  to  present  to  God  what- 
ever -hall  come  to  meet  him.  In  the  form  of  a 
tow,  and  with  indefinite  fullness,  he  declares  his 
readiness  to  resign  whatsoever  God  himself,  by  his 
providential  orderings,  shall  mark  out.  It  is  pre- 
cisely in  this  that  the  conscious  opposition  of  the 
vow  to  the  abominable  sacrifices  of  the  Ammon- 
ites expresses  itself.  The  highest  self-abnegation 
is  displayed ;  but  in  connection  with  it.  the  will  of 
God  is  sought  after,  (jod  himself  will  determine 
what  is  acceptable  to  Him  ;  and  Jephthah  knows 
that  this  God  has  said:  "  When  thou  art  come  into 
the  land  which  Jehovah  thy  God  giveth  thee,  thou 
ihalt  not  learn  to  do  after  the  abominations  of 
those  nations.  There  shall  not  be  found  among 
you  any  one  that  maketh  his  son  or  his  daughter 
to  pass  through  the  fire  (which  was  the  Molech- 
worship  of  the  Ammonites)  ;  .  .  .  .  for  every 
one  that  doeth  these  things,  is  an  abomination 
unto  Jehovah ;  and  because  of  these  abominations 
doth  Jehovah  thy  God  drive  them  out  from  before 
thee"  (Deut.  xviii.  9  ffi).  To  the  expulsion  of  the 
nations  by  God,  in  favor  of  Israel,  Jephthah1  him- 

1  That  it  is  just  Jephthah,  and  he  as  the  hero  of  law 
and  faith,  who  presents  this  contrast  with  Ammon  and  hu- 
man sacrifices,  those  expositors  have  overlooked,  who,  in 
ipite  of  the  God  who  was  with  him,  describe  this  very  Jeph- 
nau  as  a  barbarous  transgressor  of  law. 

-  Our  exposition   puts  no  new  and  strained  interpreta- 


self  formerly  appealed.  We  conclude,  therefore 
that  the  very  formula  of  this  vow,  made  on  the  eve 
of  war  with  Ammon,  excludes  the  idea  of  a  human 
sacrifice. 

The  sacrificial  system  of  Israel  stands  through- 
out in  marked  contrast  with  the  Canaanitish  Mo- 
lech service.  Its  animal  sacrifices  are  the  spiritual 
symbols  which  it  opposes  to  the  abominations  of 
Canaan.  To  see  this,  it  is  only  necessary  to  refer 
once  more  to  the  sacrifice  of  Abraham.  God  says 
to  him  :  Offer  me  Isaac  for  a  whole  burnt-offering 

(n/3?v);  and  when  Abraham  is  about  to  give 
Isaac  wholly  up,  an  animal  is  substituted  for  him 

(Gen.  xxii.  2,  10  ff).  Since  that  time,  nbi? 
(burnt-offering  or  whole  burnt-offering)  is  the  typ- 
ical and  technical  terra  for  an  animal  sacrifice, 
symbolical  of  perfect  surrender  and  consecration  to 
God.  The  offerings  which  were  thus  named,  were 
wholly  consumed  by  fire.      Nothing  was  left  of 

them.  Hence,  precisely  71  ^  3?.  in  its  sense  of  ani- 
mal sacrifice,  presented  a  strong  contrast  with  the 
worship  of  the  Ammonites,  for  among  them  hu- 
man beings  were  offered  up  in  the  same  manner  as 
the  Israelites  offered  animals. 

When  Gideon  is  directed  to  destroy  the  altar  of 
Baal,  he  is  at  the  same  time  commanded  to  offer  a 

bullock  as  a  whole  burnt-offering  (i~l  -13?)  on  an 
altar  to  be  erected  by  himself,  and  to  consume  it 
with  the  wood  of  the  Asherah  (ch.  vi.  26).2    Such 

also  is  the  whole  burnt-offering  (n  ?3?),  to  offer 
which  permission  is  given  to  Manoah,  the  father 
of  Samson,  without  any  mention  being  made  of 
the  animal  (ch.  xiii.  16).  The  influence  of  wor 
ship  on  language  in  Israel,  brought  it  about  that 

^7?'  to  offer,  signifies  the  offering  of  an  animal 
which  is  to  be  wholly  consumed  in  the  sacred  fire. 
It  is  therefore  significant  and  instructive,  when  in 
Jephthah's  vow  we  find  the  expression  :  "  It  shall 
be  Jehovah's,  and  I  will  present  it  as  a  whole  burnt 

offering  (i°1v3?).  In  no  other  instance  in  which 
the  bringing  of  a  whole  burnt-offering  is  spoken  of, 
is  the  additional  expression,  "  it  shall  be  Jeho- 
vah's," made  use  of,  not  even  in  the  instances  of 
Gideon  and  Manoah,  although  this  of  Jephthah 
is  chronologically  enclosed  between  them.  How 
strangelv  would  it  have  sounded,  if  it  had  been 
said  to  Gideon  :  "  Take  the  bullock ;  it  shall  be- 
long to  Jehovah,  and  thou  shalt  present  it  as  a 
whole  burnt-offering.  For  the  bullock  is  presented 
in  order  that  Gideon  may  belong  to  God.  It  is 
offered,  not  for  itself,  but  for  men.  It  is  placed  on 
the  altar  of  God,  just  because  it  is  the  property  of 
man.  It  is  foreign  to  the  spirit  of  Biblical  Ian 
guage  and  life  to  say  of  a  sacrificial  animal,  "  it 
shall  belong  to  God,"  for  the  reason  that  the  ani 
mal  comes  to  hold  a  religious  relation  to  God, 
only  because  it  belongs  to  man,  and  is  offered  in 
man's  behalf.  An  animal  belonging  to  God,  in  » 
religious  sense,  without  being  offered  up,  is  incon 
ceivable.     At  least,  it  cannot  be  permitted  to  :  ve. 

Very  important  for  this  subject,  is  the  passage 
in  Ex.  xiii.  12,  13.  It  is  there  commanded  that, 
when  Israel  shall  have  come  into  Canaan,  every 

tions  on  ~1~TD  and  il  .13?.  but  leaves  them  to  be  under 
stood  in  their  general  and  well  known  Biblical  acceptation  — 
n  /13?    being  here  the  symbol  of  a  spiritual  truth,  whil« 

yet  it  ignores  animal  sacrifices  as  little  as  does  H3I*,  w 
Ps.  li.  21  (19). 


172 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


first-born  shall  be  set  apart  unto  Jehovah,  both 
the  firstlings  of  every  beast  "  which  thou   hast " 

(f1?  iT.iT.  ">??]?)>  and  the  first-born  of  man.  The 
firstling  of  snch  animals  as  cannot  be  offered,  the 
ass,  for  instance,  is  to  be  redeemed  with  money  ; 
or,  if  the  owner  do  not  wish  to  redeem  it,  he  must 
kill  it.  The  first-born  of  man,  however,  must  be 
redeemed.  The  first-born  animal  is  moreover  set 
apart  for  God  only  on  account  of  man,  its  owner. 
This  substitutionary  "  belonging  to  God,"  it  can 
only  represent  in  death.  Hence  the  expression, 
"  it  shall  belong  to  God,"  is  never  used  of  animals, 
but  they  are  said  to  be  "  offered."  On  the  con- 
trary, it  can  be  applied  only  to  human  beings ;  "  he 
shall  belong  to  God,"  shall  live  for  God.  conscious 
of  his  own  free  will  and  of  the  divine  Spirit,  which 
consciousness  is  wanting  in  animals.  Scripture 
itself  gives  this  explanation,  Num.  iii.  12,  where 
it  is  said  :  "  Behold,  I  have  taken  the  Levites  from 
among  the  sons  of  Israel,  instead  of  all  the  first- 
born ;  therefore,  the  Levites  belong  to  me  (l^} 

E*.?1?'?  I|1?)."  The  Levites  belong  to  God  for  all 
Israel  through  their  life ;  the  first-born  of  animals, 
through  their  sacrificial  death.  Accordingly,  Han- 
nah also,  when  she  makes  her  vow  to  God,  says, 
that  if  a  son  be  granted  her,  she  will  give  him  unto 
Jehovah  ;  and  when  she  brings  him  to  the  taberna- 
cle, that  he  is  "  lent  unto  Jehovah  (Hyp;?  71NK?, 
1  Sam.  i.  28)  as  long  as  he  liveth." 

We  perceive,  therefore,  that  in  the  words  of 
Jcphthah,  "it  shall' be  Jehovah's,  and  I  will  pre- 
sent it  as  a  whole  burnt-ottering,"  there  can  be  no 
mere  tautology.  The  two  clauses  do  not  coincide 
in  meaning  ;  they  cannot  stand  the  one  for  the 
other. 

It  is  necessary,  however,  to  attend  to  every  word 
of  this  remarkable  verse.  For  the  vow  is  a  con- 
tract, every  point  of  which  has  its  importance,  and 
in  which  not  only  one  being  is  thought  of,  but  in 
which  all  creatures,  human  beings  as  well  as  brute 
beasts,  the  few  or  the  many,  that  may  come  forth 
to  meet  Jephthah,  are  included,  and  each  is  con- 
secrated as  his  kind  permits.  The  vow  speaks  of 
whatsoever  cometh  forth  "  out  of  the  doors  of  my 
house."  Many  will  come  to  meet  him,  but  he  can 
offer  only  of  that  which  is  his ;  over  the  rest  he 
has  no  power  of  disposition.  His  promise  extends 
to  what  comes  out  of  his  own  house  ;  and  not  to 
anything  that  comes  accidentally,  but  to  what 
comes  "to  meet  him."  It  must  come  forth  for  the 
purpose  of  receiving  him.  But  even  then,  the  vow 
becomes  binding  only  when  he  returns  crowned 

with  victory  and  salvation  (D1  "273),  and  that,  not 
over  any  and  every  foe,  but  over  Amnion.  If  thus 
he  be  permitted  to  return,  then  whatever  meets 
him  "  shall  be  Jehovah's,  and  he  will  present  it  as 
a  whole  burnt-ottering." 

The  promise  must  necessarily  be  expressed  with 
the  greatest  exactitude.  This  was  demanded  by 
the  requirement  of  the  law,  that  he  who  makes  a 
vow  "  shall  keep  and  perform  that  which  is  gone 
out  of  his  lips,  even  as  he  vowed"  (Deut.  xxiii.  24 
[23]  ;  Num.  xxx.  2).  Had  Jephthah  thought  only 
of  animals,  he  would  merely  have  employed  the 
formula  usual  in  such  cases  —  "and  I  will  present 
t  unto  thee  as  a  whole  burnt-ottering."     It  would 


not  have  been  sufficient  to  have  said,  "  it  shal 
belong  to  Jehovah,"  because  an  animal  belongs  tt 
God  in  this  sense  only  when  sacrificed  for  men 
Precisely  the  insertion  of  the  words,  "  it  shall 
belong  to  Jehovah,"  proves,  therefore,  that  ho 
thought  also  of  human  beings.  The  generality 
and  iireadth  of  the  vow  makes  both  clauses  neces- 
sary, since  either  one  alone  would  not  have  cov- 
ered both  men  and  animals.  The  first  was  inap- 
plicable to  animals,  the  second  to  human  beings. 
Both  being  used,  the  one  explains  and  limits  the 
other.  The  main  stress  lies  on  the  words,  "  it  shall 
belong  to  Jehovah,"  for  therein  is  suggested  the 
ground  of  the  vow.  They  also  stand  first.  Were 
human  beings  in  question  ?  then  the  first  clause  went 
into  full  operation;  and  the  second  taught  that  a 
life  "  belonging  to  God  "  must  be  one  as  fully  with- 
drawn from  this  earthly  life  as  is  the  sacrificial  vie 
tim  not  redeemed  according  to  law ;  while  the  first 
limited  the  second,  by  intimating  that  a  human 
being  need  not  be  actually  offered  up,  as  the  letter 
of  the  promise  seemed  to  require,  but  that  the  im- 
portant point  is  that  it  belong  wholly  to  God. 

God  demands  no  vows.  It  is  no  sin,  when  none 
are  made.  But  when  one  has  been  made,  it  must 
be  kept.  Jephthah  obtains  the  victory  :  God  does 
his  part ;  and  the  trying  hour  soon  comes  in  which 
Jephthah  must  do  his.  But,  as  in  battle,  so  in  the 
hour  of  private  distress,  he  approves  himself,  and 
triumphs,  albeit  with  tears. 

HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

Jephthah  is  deeply  impressed  with  the  extraor- 
dinary nature  of  the  call  he  has  received.  For 
it  is  only  because  he  is  humble,  that  he  is  called. 
Gideon,  in  his  slight  estimate  of  himself,  asks  of 
God  to  show  him  miraculous  signs  on  such  objects 
as  he  points  out.  Jephthah,  regarding  the  under- 
taking as  great  and  himself  as  small,  would  fain 
give  to  God  whatever  He  himself  shall  elect.  His 
vow  is  the  offspring  of  his  humility.  It  is  pressed 
out  of  him  by  the  extraordinary  calling  which  is 
imposed  upon  him.  His  love  values  nothing  so 
highly,  that  he  should  not  leave  it  to  God  to  decide 
what  shall  be  given  up  ;  but  the  will  of  God  often 
goes  sorely  against  the  heart. 

So  deeply,  also,  does  every  truly  humble  man 
feel  his  calling  as  Christian  and  as  citizen.  "  It  is 
difficult  to  be  a  Christian."  says  the  heart,  terrified 
at  itself.  And  yet,  for  him  who  has  been  redeemed 
through  penitence  and  faith,  it  is  so  easy.  He 
only  would  give  all,  who  knows  that  he  must  re- 
ceive all.  But  the  love  of  the  soul  that  gives  itself 
up,  is  stronger  than  its  own  strength.  No  true 
vow  is  made  to  the  Lord  without  self-crucifixion. 
God's  ways  are  incomprehensible.  Whom  He 
loves,  He  chastens.  We  are  ready  to  give.  Him 
everything;  but  when  He  takes,  wo  weep.  A 
broken  heart  is  more  pleasing  to  Him  than  sacri- 
fice     No  Passion,  no  Gospel. 

Geklach  :  The  design  of  this  history  (concern- 
ing the  vow)  is  not  so  much  to  set  forth  the  rude- 
ness of  the  age,  or  the  dangers  of  rashly  made 
vows,  as  rather  to  show  how  Israel  was  saved  from 
its  enemies  by  the  faith  of  Jephthah,  ar  d  how  the 
service  of  the  true  God  was  restored  under  th« 
heaviest  sacrifices  of  the  faithful. 


CHAPTER  XI.    34-40.  173 


Jeho- 

sons] 


Jepkthah,  returning  victoriously,  is  met  by  his  daughter.      The  fulfillment  of  his  vow 

Chapter  XI.     34-40. 

34  And  Jephthah  came  to  Mizpeh  [Mizpah]  unto  his  house,  and  behold,  his  daugh- 
ter came  [comes]  out  to  meet  him  with  timbrels  and  with  dances  :  and  she  was  his 

35  only  child ;  beside  her  '  he  had  neither  son  nor  daughter.  And  it  came  to  pass, 
when  he  saw  her,  that  he  rent  his  clothes,  and  said,  Alas,  my  daughter  !  thou  hast 
brought  [thou  bringest]  me  very  low,  and  thou  art  one  of  them  [the  only  one]  ■ 
that  trouble  [afliicteth]  me  :  for  I  have  opened  my  mouth  unto  the  Lord  [Jehovah], 

36  and  I  cannot  go  back.     And  she  said  unto  him,  My  father,  if  [omit :  if]  thou  hast 
[hast  thou]  opened  thy  mouth  unto  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  [then]  do  to  me  according 
to  that  which  hath  proceeded  out  of  thy  mouth  ;  forasmuch   as  the  Lord  "" 
vah]  hath  taken 3  vengeance  for  thee  of  thine  enemies,  even  of  the  children 

37  of  Ammon.     And  she  said  unto  her  father,  Let  this  thing  be  done  for  [to]  me 
Let  me  alone  two  months,  that  I  may  go  up  and  down   [may  go  and   descend]  6 
upon  the  mountains,  and  bewail  [weep  over]  my  virginity,  I  and  my  fellows  [com- 

38  panions].  And  he  said,  Go.  And  he  sent  her  away  [dismissed  her]  for  two 
months  :  and   she  went   with  her  companions,  and   bewailed  [wept  over]   her  vir- 

39  ginity  upon  the  mountains.  And  it  came  to  pass  at  the  end  of  two  months,  that 
she  returned  unto  her  father,  who  did  with  her  according  to  his  vow  which  he  had 

40  vowed :  and  she  knew  no  man.  And  it  was  [became]  a  custom  in  Israel,  That 
the  daughters  of  Israel  went  yearly  to  lament  [praise]  the  daughter  of  Jephthah 
the  Gileadite  four  days  in  a  [the]  year. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 
[1  Ver.  34.  — ^372TD     for  H2ST2,  because  the  neutral  conception  "child"  floats  before  the  writer'a  mind,  cf.  Ber- 

V     »  '  TV"' 

th. mu.  The  explanation  of  ^373D  by  ex  se,  implying  that  Jephthah,  though  he  had  no  other  child  of  his  own,  had 
itep-children,  would,  as  Bertheau  says,  be  tf  unworthy  of  mention,"  were  it  not  suggested  in  the  margin  of  the  E.  V 
—  Tb.] 

[2  Ver.  35.  —  ^D3?2  j"T^n  might  be  rendered  :  tf  thou  art  among  those  who  afflict  me.1'  But  the  H  is  prob- 
ably the  so-called  2  essentia!  (Keil),  and  simply  ascribes  the  characteristic  of  a  class  to  the  daughter  (cf.  Ges.  Gram. 
154,  3,  a).  Dr.  Cassel's  "  only  "  is  not  expressed  in  the  original,  but  is  readily  suggested  by  the  contrast,  of  the  sad  scene 
with  all  the  other  relations  of  the  moment.  —  Ta.J 

[8  Ver.  36. —  nt£7^7,  lit.  "  done,"'  with  evident  reference  to  the  same  word  used  just  before  :  tf  do,  since  Jehovah  hath 

T    T  ' 

done,"  cf.  the  Commentary.  —  Tr.] 

[i  Ver.  37  —Dr.  Cassel  makes  this  clause  refer  to  the  fulfillment  of  the  vow,  and  renders  :  ft  Let  this  thing  be  done 
onto  me.  only  let  me  alone  two  months,"  etc.  But  it  clearly  introduces  the  request  for  a  brief  period  of  delay,  and  is 
rightly  rendered  by  the  E.  V.,  with  which  Bertheau,  Keil,  De  Wette  agree,  cf.  the  Commentary.  — Tr.] 

[6  Ver.  37.  —  "*n~T~lN1,  "  descend,"  i.  e.  from  the  elevated  situation  of  Mizpah  (cf.  on  vers.  29,  33),  to  the  neighbor- 
ing lower  hills  and  valleys  (Keil).  T^  does  not  mean  to  "  wander  up  and  down,"  a  rendering  suggested  only  by  the  ao- 

tt 
parent  incongruity  of tc  descending  "  upon  the  "  mountains."  —  Tr.] 

exegetical  and  DOCTRINAL.  j  dances,  to  celebrate  her  father's  victory !     He  sees 

her,  and   is   struck   with   horror.     It  is   hie  only 
Vers.  34-36.    And  behold,  his  daughter  comes   chi|d  .  and  h!s  vow  tears  her  frora  his  arm8j  and 

out  to  meet  him.  A  great  victory  had  been  makes  him  childless.  Broad  as  his  vow  was,  he 
gained.  The  national  enemy  was  thoroughly  sub-  never  thought  that  he  could,  even  if  he  would,  in- 
dued. All  Gilead  was  in  a  joyful  uproar.  The  c]llde  her  in  it  This  again  appears  from  tne  cir- 
return  of  the  victorious  hero  is  a  triumphal  prog-  cumstance|  already  adverted  to,  that  the  victory 
ress ;  but  when  he  approaches  his  home,  his  vow  and  the  vow  are  against   Ammon.     The  heathen 


re  wives  a  most  painful  and  unexpected  definition 
"It  shall  be  God's,  and  not  belong  to  the  victor" 
—  so  runs  the  vow  —  "  whatsoever  comes  out  of 
my  house  to  meet  me."  And  here  is  his  daughter 
x>ming  towards  him,  with  tambourines  and  choral 

i  [Dr.    Cassel  manifestly   views    Jepbthah'e  vow   as   sui 
feneris  —  not  belonging   to  the  class  of  vows  treated  of 


promised  or  sacrificed  their  first-born  sons.     Ac- 
cording  to   the  Mosaic   law,   also,   the  first-born 

males  (C,"?3*)    belong  to   God.     The  same  law 
permitted  only  male1  victims    to  be  presented  as 

ions  there  made.     Jephthah  proposes  a  whole  burnt-offering 

—  spiritual  indeed  so  far  as  it?  possible   human  subjects  arf 

!*v   xxvii   1  ff.  and  therefore  not  falling   under  the  provis-  ]  concerned,  but  still  bound  by  the  law  of  whole   burnt-offer 


174 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


whole  burnt-offerings  (Lev.  i.  3).  Jephthah's  de- 
sign was  to  testify  that  he  gave  himself  up  to  his 
God  as  entirely  as  the  Ammonites  imagined  them- 
selves to  do  to  their  idols.  He  would  have  conse- 
crated his  first-born  son  to  God  —  Abraham's 
child,  also,  was  a  boy,  — but  he.  had  none.  Hence, 
he  expresses  his  self-renunciation  in  the  form  of  a 
vow,  in  which  he  leaves  it  to  God  to  select  whatever 
should  be  most  precious  in  his  eyes.  But  of  his 
daughter  he  did  not  think.  It  never  even  occurred 
to  him  that  she  might  come  forth  to  meet  him ;  for 

that  was  usually  done  only  by  women1  (CNtP3, 
Ex.  xv.  20  ;  1  Sam.  xviii.  6),  not  by  maidens,  who 
remained  within  the  house ;  and  Jephthah's  daugh- 
ter was  yet  a  rOVI?,  virgin.  But  this  daughter 
was  worthy  of  her  father.  The  victory  was  so 
great,  that  she  breaks  through  the  restraints  of 
custom,  and,  like  Miriam  (the  same  terms  are  used 
here  as  on  the  occasion  of  Moses'  song  of  victory, 
Ex.  xv.  20),  goes  forth  to  meet  the  conqueror.  As 
soon  as  Jephthah  sees  her,  he  recognizes  the  will 
of  God.  His  vow  is  accepted  ;  but  comprehen- 
sive as  he  consciously  made  it,  it  is  God  who  now 
first  interprets  it  for  him  in  all  its  fullness.  The 
hero  had  made  the  vow  in  this  indefinite  form,  be- 
cause he  had  nu  only  and  dearly  loved  son  like 
Isaac.  True,  he  had  a  daughter ;  but  he  deemed 
himself  debarred  from  consecrating  her,  and  there 
fore  makes  his  vow.  God  now  teaches  him  that 
he  looks  not  at  the  sex  of  the  consecrated,  but  at 
the  heart  of  the  consecrator.  However  compre- 
hensive Jephthah's  vow,  without  his  daughter  it 
would  at  most  have  cost  him  money  or  propertv, 
but  his  heart  would  have  offered  no  sacrifice.  God 
teaches  him  that  He  delights  not  in  he-goats  and 
oxen ; 2  that  that  which  pleases  Him  is  a  broken 
heart.  His  heart  breaks  within  him,  when  he  sees 
his  daughter.  She  is  his  darling,  his  sole  orna- 
ment, the  light  of  his  house,  the  jewel  of  his  heart ; 
and  from  her  he  must  separate.  He  comes  home 
the  greatest  in  Israel ;  he  now  feels  himself  the 
poorest.  But  he  perceives  that  this  is  the  real  ful- 
fillment of  his  vow  ;  that  God  cares  not  for  monev 
or  property.  The  highest  offering,  which  God 
values,  is  a  chastened  heart.  Obedience  is  better 
than  sacrifice.  The  life  is  not  in  the  letter :  every 
contract  with  God  must  be  kept  in  the  spirit. 
Jephthah's  faith  revealed  itself  before  the  battle. 
That  God  was  with  him,  was  proved  by  his  victorv. 
But  his  entire  self-surrender  to  God  approves  itself 
still  more  beautifully  after  the  battle.  For  he 
conquers  himself.  He  bowed  himself  reverently  be- 
fore God,  before  the  decision  was  given ;  but  his 
deepest  piety  manifests  itself  afterwards.  He  gives 
his  own  people,  he  gives  Amnion  and  Moab,  an 
instance  of  the  power  of  an  Israelite  to  perform 
the  vows  he  has  made.  He  suffers  his  vow  to  bind 
him,  but  does  not  attempt  to  bind  it.     He  inter- 

ings.  Now,  that  law  requires  that  offerings  shalt  be  of  the 
mule  geDder  ;  whereas  ordinary  vows  might  embrace  fe- 
males, Lev.  xxvii.  4.  This  view  will  impart  clearness  to 
some  of  our  author's  sen  euces  farther  on,  where  he  inti- 
mates that  Jephthah  could  not  redeem  his  daughter  with- 
out t-iking  'f  refuge  behind  external  formulae,"  i.  e.  without 
Interpreting  the  vow,  as  if  it  belonged  to  a  class  of  vows  to 
which  it  was  not  originally  meant  to  belong.  —  Tr.] 

1  [Fraitfn,  by  which    the  author   evidently  means  mar- 

Tint  women.  But  D^tTS  bears  no  such  restricted  sense, 
if.  tli'S  Lex.  s.  v.  Morcnver.  thai  maidens  were  confined  to 
the  house  is  a  proposition  decidedly  negatived  by  all  we 
xnnn  of  the  position  of  the  female  sex  among  the  Hebrews, 
tec  Bible    Diet.,  art   f*  Women.'"  —  Tr.] 

-   Ai'iHiiently  similar   thoughts,  \t  i9  true,  are  suggested 


prets  it,  not  according  to  the  letter,  but  the  spirit 
Lev.  xxvii.  4,  5  prescribes  the  way  in  which  a 
woman,  concerning  whom  a  vow  has  been  made, 
is  to  be  redeemed.  But  his  only  little  daughter, 
who  comes  to  meet  him,  he  cannot  protect.  Sine* 
God  leads  her  forth  towards  him,  He  cannot  in- 
tend an  ottering  of  ten  shekels  (Lev.  xxvii.  5).  His 
pious  soul  does  not  take,  refuge  behind  external 
formulas ;  as  we  read  in  connection  with  heathen 
vows  and  bad  promises.3  He  recognizes  the  fact 
that,  since  his  only,  dearly  loved  child  comes  to 
meet  him,  God  demands  of'  him  all  the  love  which 
he  cherishes  for  her,  and  ali  the  pain  which  it  will 
cost  him  to  part  with  her.  And  in  this  conviction, 
he  hesitates  not  for  an  instant.  He  believes  like 
Abraham :  and,  like  him,  albeit  with  a  bleeding 
heart,  makes  full  surrender  of  what  God  requires. 
The  scene  of  Jephthah's  meeting  with  his 
daughter  has  no  equal  in  pathetic  power.  Her  we 
see  advancing  with  a  radiant  face,  giving  voice  to 
her  jubilant  heart,  surrounded  by  dancing  com- 
panions, and  longing  to  hear  her  father's  happy- 
greeting  ;  while  he,  in  the  midst  of  sounding  tim- 
brels and  triumphant  shouts  —  hides  his  face  for 
agony  !  What  might  have  been  a  moment  of  loud- 
est jubilation,  is  become  one  of  the  deepest  sorrow. 
That  on  which  his  imagination  had  fondly  dwelt 
as  the  crowning  point  of  his  joy  —  the  honor  with 
which  he  could  encircle  the  head  of  his  only  child, 
his  virgin-daughter,  now  the  first  in  all  the  nation 
—  was  instantly  transformed  into  the  heaviest  woe. 
"  0  my  daughter,  deeply  hast  thou  caused  me  to 
bow,  and  thou  alone  distressest  me."  He  borrows 
the  words  perhaps  from  the  panegyrical  song  in 
which  she  celebrates  him  as  "  having  caused  the 
enemy  to  kneel,4  and  to  be  distressed ;  "  and  in  the 
extremity  of  his  grief  applies  them  to  his  child, 
thus  suddenly  astonished  and  struck  dumb  in  the 
midst  of  her  joy.  "  But,"  continues  the  hero, 
though  his  heart  weeps,  "  I  have  opened  my  mouth 
unto  Jehovah,  and  I  cannot  go  back."  I  promised 
God  in  the  spirit  of  sincerity,  and  must  perform  it 
in  the  same  spirit.  And  there  is  not  in  all  an- 
tiquity, no,  nor  yet  in  Holy  Scripture,  an  instance 
of  a  maiden  uttering  a  more  beautiful,  more  pro- 
foundly pathetic  word,  than  that  which  Jephthah's 
daughter,  a  hero's  daughter,  a  true  child  of  Israel, 
speaks  to  her  father,  even  while  as  yet  she  knows 
not  the  purport  of  the  vow  :  "  Hast  thou  opened 
thy  mouth  to  Jehovah,  then  do  according  to  that 
which  proceeded  out  of  thy  mouth ;  for  Jehovah 
also  hath  done  according  to  thy  word,  and  hath 
taken  vengeance  on  thy  enemies."  She  neither 
deprecates  nor  laments,  gives  no  start,  exhibits  no 
despair  —  does  nothing  to  make  her  faiher  waver  ; 
but,  on  the  contrary,  encourages  him,  refers  him 
to  what  God  has  done,  and  bids  him  do  as  he  has 
promised,  not  to  think,  as  he  might  perhaps  be 
tempted  to  do,  of  change  or  modification  in  her 

from  a  heathen  point  of  view,  not  only  by  such  examples  as 
that  of  Iphigenia  (cf.  Cicero,  <le  Officiis,  ii.  95),  and  of  Cur- 
tius  in  Rome,  but  also  by  that  of  Anchurus.  the  son  of  the 
Phrygian  king  .Midas,  who  deemed  his  own  life  the  most 
precious  sacrifice  that  could  be  offered  from  his  father's  pos- 
sessions to  the  gods.  But  in  reality,  these  exhibit  only  the 
principles  that  underlie  the  practice  of  human  sacrifices  — 
principles,  with  which  the  spirit  of  the  Scriptures,  aud  their 
spiritual  modes  of  conception,  stand  strongly  in  coutrast. 
3  Cf.  Nagelsbach.  NachJwmerische  Theologie,  p.  244,  etc. 

•1  ^rijnDn  5?TOn,  from  2H3,  tokneel;  HiphiL 
to  cause  to  kneel,  to  subdue.  She  saug  perhaps  about  th« 
enemies  whom  he  had  subdued  (cf.  ch.  v.  27) ;  he  sadly  ap- 
plies her  words  to  what  she  is  doing  with  reference  to  him 
self. 


CHAPTER    XI.    34-40. 


17. 


favor.  Such  is  the  delicacy  and  tenderness  of  the 
narrative,  that  the  modes  of  thought  and  feeling 
characteristic  of  this  heroic  daughter,  as  such,  stand 
out  in  full  relief;  for  it  is  in  true  womanly  style 

.hat  she  says  to  her  father :  "  Since  Jehovah  hath 
taken  vengeance  of  thine  enemies."  The  utter- 
ance is  altogether  personal,  as  her  womanly  inter- 
est was  personal.  She  concentrates  the  national 
victory  in  that  of  her  father;  the  national  enemy 
in  the  enemies  of  her  father.     God  has  given  him 

vengeance  UTl^i^?) ;  consequently  he  is  bound, 
personally,  to  give  to  God  what  he  has  promised. 

Vers.  37—40.  And  she  said  to  her  father,  Let 
this  thing  be  done  to  me.  The  noble  maiden 
may  boldly  take  her  place  by  the  side  of  Isaac, 
who,  according  to  the  narrative  in  Genesis,  was  not 
aware  of  the  sacrifice  to  which  he  was  destined. 
Sir  gives  herself  up  to  her  father,  freely  and  joy- 
fully, to  be  dealt  with  as  his  vow  demanded. 
Heathen  antiquity,  also,  has  similar  instances  of 
virgins  voluntarily  offering  themselves  up  for  their 
native  land.  But  comparison  will  point  out  the 
liflcrence  between  them  and  the  case  of  Jephthah's 
laughter,  and  will  help  to  show  that  here  there 
ran  be  no  thought  of  a  literal  sacrifice  of  life. 
Pausanias  (i.  32)  relates  the  legend,  dramatically 
treated  by  Euripides,  that  when  the  Athenians, 
who  harbored  the  descendants  of  Hercules,  were  at 
war  with  the  Peloponnesians,  an  oracle  declared 
the  voluntary  death  of  one  of  those  descendants 
to  be  necessary  in  order  to  secure  victory  to  the 
Athenians;  whereupon  Macaria  killed  herself. — 
When  the  Thebans  were  waging  war  with  the 
Orchomenians,  the  oracle  advised  them.  that,  if 
they  were  to  conquer,  their  most  distinguished  fel- 
low-citizen must  sacrifice  himself  (Pans.  ix.  17). 
Antipcenus,  who  is  this  most  distinguished  citizen, 
despises  the  oracle  ;  his  daughters,  on  the  contrary, 
honor  it,  and  devote  themselves  to  death.  —  In  the 
war  of  Ereehtheus  with  Eumolpns,  the  oracle  re- 
quired of  the  former  the  sacrifice  of  his  daughters. 
They  voluntarily  killed  themselves  (Apoll.  iil.  15, 
11  :  ef.  Heyne  on  the  passage).  The  same  thing 
is  told  of  Marias  by  Plutarch.  Defeated  by  the 
Cimbrians,  a  divine  oracle  informed  him  that  be 
would  conquer,  if  he  offered  up  his  daughter, 
which  he  did.  In  all  these  legends,  which  might 
he  greatly  multiplied,  an  oracle  commands  the 
virgin-sacrifice;  in  all  of  them,  a  vigorous,  super- 
stitious belief  in  the  atoning  efficacy  of  pure  blood, 
such  as  appears  in  the  German  legend  of  Poor 
Heinrich,  is  the  underlying  motive  ;  in  all  of  them, 
also,  the  virgin-sacrifice  forms  the  preliminary  con- 
dition of  victory.  But  in  the  history  of  Jepbthah 
all  this  is  changed.  Jephthah  makes  a  vow,  but 
does  not  think  of  his  daughter.  In  his  case,  the 
vow  is  a  recognition  of  the  fact  that  victory  belongs, 
not  to  men,  but  to  God.  He  makes  a  vow,  although 
God  has  not  required  one.  He  keeps  it,  even  after 
victory,  although  the  extent  of  the  sacrifice  had 
not  been  anticipated.  Neither  he  nor  his  daughter 
think  of  evasions,  such,  e.  g.,  as  Pausanias  (iv.  9) 
speaks  of  in  connection  with  similar  histories  in 
Messenia.  And  yet,  the  offering  which  each  of 
them  brings  is  as  trying  as  death  would  be,  al- 
though it  cannot  actually  involve  death.  For  that 
ooint  is  decided,  not  only  by  the  different  state- 
ments of  the  history  itself,  but  especially  by  the 
fact  that  the  offering  is  made  to  Jehovah,  who,  even 
when,  as  in  the  case  of  Abraham,  he  himself  re- 

1  Similar  customs  may  be  found  even  in  modern  times. 
In  a  \Vest-91avic  legend  a  maiden  is  blamed  for  having 
narrirtd  without  having  tAkeu  leave  of  maidenhood,  which 


quires  a  sacrifice,  will  not  suffer  obedience  to  con- 
summate itself  in  deeds  of  blood. 

Let  me  alone  two  months,  that  I  may  go  and 
descend  upon  the  mountains,  and  weep  over 
my  virginity.  I  and  my  companions.  No  equiv. 
ocal  intimation  is  here  given  of  the  fate  which 
befell  the  daughter  of  Jephthah.  She  was  still  in 
her  father's  house,  an  only  daughter,  not  yet  mar- 
ried. Since  the  vow  touches  her,  and  devotes  her 
entirely  as  an  offering  to  God,  she  must  belong  to 
no  one  else,  consequently  not  to  her  father,  nor  to 
a  husband.  She  cannot  be  married,  and  will  never 
rejoice  over  children.     That  is  Jephthah's  sorrow 

—  his  house  is  withered  away  ("™,~>.P1.  his  family 
disappears.  The  highest  happiness  in  Israel,  to 
have  children,  and  thus  to  see  one's  name  or  house 
continued,  will  not  be  his.  The  dearest  of  all 
beings,  his  only  child,  is  dead  to  him  The  same 
sorrow,  and  in  accordance  with  ancient  feelings 
with  even  greater  severity,  if  that  were  possible, 
falls  on  the  virgin  daughter  herself.  An  unmar- 
ried life  was  equivalent  to  death  for  the  maid°n»  of 
ancient  Israel.  For  the  bud  withers  away.  Con- 
jugal love  and  duty,  the  blossoms  of  lite,  do  not 
appear.  Unmarried  maidens  have  no  place  in  the 
life  of  the  state.  Marriage  forms  the  crown  of 
normal  family  life.  The  psalm  (lxxviii.  63)  notes 
it  as  part  of  the  utmost  popular  misery,  that  "  the 
fire  f*of  war)  consumes  the  young  men,  and  the 
maidens  are  not  celebrated  "  (in  marriage  songs). 
Analogous  sentiments  are  frequent  in  the  life  of 
ancient  nations.  The  Brahminism  of  India  looks 
upon  a  childless  condition  as  in  the  highest  degree 
disgraceful  A  woman  is  always  in  need  of  manly 
guidance  and  protection  ;  be  it  as  daughter  from 
her  father,  as  wife  from  her  husband,  or  as  mother 
from  her  sons  (cf.  Bohlen,  Altes  Indien,  ii  141  ff.). 
The  laws  of  Lycurgus  concerning  marriage,  and 
their  penalties  against  men  who  did  not  marry,  are 
familiar.  Noteworthy,  with  reference  to  the  cus- 
toms of  Asia  Minor,  is  an  episode  in  the  history 
of  Polycrates,  the  tyrant  of  Samos.  Being  urgently 
warned  bv  his  daughter  against  leaving  his  island 
to  go  to  Oroetus,  who  was  on  the  continent,  he  be- 
came angry,  and  threatened  her,  that  in  case  of 
his  safe  return  home,  she  should  long  afterwards 
continue  to  be  a  virgin  ;  to  which  the  dutiful  daugh- 
ter replied,  that  she  would  gladly  remain  virgin 
much  longer  still,  if  only  she  did  not  lose  hei 
father  (Herod,  iii.  124). 

And  weep  over  my  virginity.  Not,  then,  it 
appears,  to  mourn  her  own  untimely  death.  If  she 
was  to  die,  it  would  have  been  unnatural  to  ask  for 
a  space  of  two  months  to  be  spent  on  the  moun- 
tains in  weeping.  In  that  case,  why  depart  with 
her  maiden  companions  ?  why  not  remain  at  home 
with  her  father  i  A  person  expecting  death  and 
ready  for  it,  would  ask  no  time  for  lamentation. 
Such  a  one  dies,  and  is  lamented  by  others.  But 
Jephthah's  daughter  is  to  live  —  a  virgin  life,  to 
which  no  honor  is  paid,  from  which  no  blossoms 
spring  —  a  life  of  stillness  and  seclusion.  No  nup- 
tial song  shall  praise,  no  husband  honor,  no  child 
grace  her.  This  weeping  of  viigins.1  because  they 
remain  without  the  praise  of  wedlock,  is  character- 
istic of  the  naive  manners  and  candid,  unaffected 
purity  of  ancient  life  through  wide-extended  cir- 
cles. Sophocles,  in  "  King  (Edipus  "  (ver.  1504), , 
makes  the  father  express  his  fears  that  "  age  will 
consume  his   children,  fruitless   and  unmarried." 

it  was  customary  to  do  in  pathetic  and  elegiac  terms 
Wenzig,  West- Slav.  Uarchauchalz,  pp.  13,311. 


176 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


Electra,  in  the  tragedy  which  bears  her  name,  says 
of  Chrysothemis  (ver.  962  f.) :  "  Well  mayest  thou 
lament  that  thou  must  grow  old  so  long  in  unmar- 
ried jovlessness ; "  just  as  she  is  herself  commis- 
erated by  Orestes  (ver.  1185)  :  "  Oh,  the  years  of 
unmarried,  anxious  life  which  thou  hast  lived." 
In  many  other  instances  of  virgins  who  must  die 
or  have  died,  the  fact  of  their  dying  unmarried  is 
lamented.  So,  for  example,  in  the  beautiful  in- 
scription of  the  Anthology  (cf.  Herder,  Werke,  xx. 
73) :  "  Dear  daughter,  thou  wentest  so  early,  and 
ere  I  adorned  thy  bridal  couch,  down  to  the  yellow 
stream  under  the  shades,"  and  in  the  plaint  of 
Polyxena  (Euripides,  Hecuba,  ver.  414):  "Un- 
married, without  nuptial  song,  which  nevertheless 
is  my  due."  The  daughter  of  Jephthah  laments 
not  that  she  must  die  as  a  virgin,  but  with  her 
maiden  companions  bewails  her  virginity  itself. 
From  year  to  year  the  daughters  of  Israel 

go  to  celebrate  in  songs  (^307'  cf-  ch.  v.  11) 
the  daughter  of  Jephthah.  Of  this  festival1 
nothing  further  is  known.  A  reflection  of  the 
feelings  it  expressed  might,  however,  be  found  in 
very  ancient  analogies.  After  the  maiden,  with 
her  companions,  has  wept  on  the  mountains  for 
two  months,  over  the  vain  promise  of  her  youth, 
she  returns  to  her  father.  The  mountains  are  the 
abode  of  a  pure  and  elevated  solitude,  in  which 
her  own  chaste  heart  and  those  of  her  companions 
can  open  themselves  without  being  overheard-  On 
mountains,  also,  and  in  unfrequented  pasture-lands 
and  forests,  abode  the  Greek  Artemis,  the  virgin 
who  goes  about  alone,  without  companions,  like 
the  moon  in  the  sky-  It  was  on  account  of  this 
her  virginity,  that  Greek  maidens  celebrated  her 
in  many  places  with  song  and  dance  ;  from  which 
practice  she  derived  the  name  Artemis  Hijmnia, 
especially  current  in  the  mountains  of  Arcadia. 
The  hymns  were  sung  by  virgin-choirs  (cf.  Welcker, 
Griech.  Mythol.  i.  585).  A  similar  festival  was  de- 
voted to  Artemis  on  Mount  Taygetus.  At  Caryas, 
also  in  Laconia,  festive  choral  dances  were  yearly 
executed  in  her  honor  (Pans.  iii.  10).  The  virgin 
goddess  was  also  called  Hecaerge  ('Exaepyri),  and 
Opis  or  Oupis  ffln-is  or  Oujtis).  0^17705  is  the 
song  of  praise,  with  which,  especially  in  Delos, 
and  in  accordance  with  peculiar  myths,  virgins 
celebrated  the  chaste  Oupis,  and  brought  her,  as 
soon  as  they  married,  a  lock,  of  their  hair  (Callim. 
in  DA.  ver.  292  ;  Pans.  i.  43).  The  same  custom  was 
observed  at  Megara  with  reference  to  Iphinoe,  who 
died  a  virgin  (Pans.  i.  43).  Here  also  tradition 
leads  us  back  to  Artemis,  who  is  styled  protectress 
of  her  father.  That  it  is  the  attributes  of  chastity 
and  virginity  which  are  thus  celebrated,  is  indicated 

1  On  the  statement  of  Epiphanius,  that  a  festival  of  the 
laughter  of  Jephthah  was  still  celebrated  in  his  time,  com- 
pare my  article  in  Herzng,  p.  476. 

'2  Hengsteuberg,  in  his  valuable  essay  on  Jephthah's  vow 
(Pentateuch,  ii.  1U5  IT.),  seeks  to  explain  the  daughter's  des- 
tiny by  means  of  an  institute  of  holy  women,  into  which 
ihe  perhaps  entered.  This  is  not  the  place  to  treat  that 
subject,  which   must   be  referred  to  1   Sam.  ii.   22.     This 

much  only  seems  to  me  to  be  certain,  that  by  the  mSD^» 
Ex.  xxxviii.  8  and  1  Sain  ii.  22,  we  are  not  to  understand 
miaistermg  women.     It  must  be  remarked,  in  general,  that 

Ihe  fundamental  signification  of  SI2—  is,  not  mililare.  but 

T  T 

to  be  in  a  multitude.11  From  this  the  idea  of  the 
.""l^SD**,  the  hosts,  in  heaven   and  on  earth,   is   derived. 

pOti*  derives  itB  meaning  tf  host,11  not  from  military  disci- 
pline, but  from  tlie  assembling  of  a  multitude  at  one  place. 


by  the  transfer  of  the  custom  in  honor  of  a  man. 
in  the  legend  of  Hippolytus.  "  Him,"  Euripido 
makes  Artemis  say,  "  shall  virgins  ever  praise  iu 
lyric  songs  ;  "  and  locks  of  hair  were  dedicated  to 
him  bv  Trcezenian  brides  (cf.  Euripides,  Htppol. 
ver.  1425;  Pans.  ii.  32). 

These  observances  are  a  reflection  of  the  narra- 
tive concerning  Jephthah's  daughter,  for  the  reason 
that  they  present  us  with  virgin  festivals,  and  with 
songs  to  the  goddess  who  did  not  die,  but  remained 
a  virgin.  In  point  of  fact,  the  existence  of  such 
festivals  points  to  conceptions  of  life  under  whose 
influence  woman,  contrary  to  the  common  rule, 
lived  in  a  state  of  virginity.  The  circumstance, 
also,  that  it  became  a  custom  in  Israel  to  "  praise  " 
the  daughter  of  Jephthah  four  days  in  every  year, 
is  itself  a  proof  that  the  practice  did  not  refer  to  a 
maiden  who  had  been  put  to  death.  For  what 
would  there  have  been  to  praise  in  what  was  not 
necessarily  dependent  on  her  own  free  will  >  As 
in  Artemis,  so  in  her,  it  is  voluntary,  self-guarded 
chastity  that  is  praised,  just  as  Hippolytus  also  is 
not  celebrated  because  he  died  unmarried,  but  be- 
cause his  life  fell  a  sacrifice  to  his  virtuous  con- 
tinence. 

And  he  did  with  her  according  to  his  vow, 
and  she  knew  no  man.  Had  she  been  put  to 
death,  that  fact  must  here  have  been  indicated  in 
some  way.  The  narrator  would  have  said,  "  and 
he  presented  her  as  a  sacrifice  at  the  altar  in  Miz- 
pah,"  or,  "  and  she  died,  having  known  no  man," 
or  some  other  similar  formula.  At  all  events,  it 
does  not  "stand  there  in  the  text,"  as  Luther 
wrote,  that  she  was  offered  in  sacrifice.  Much 
rather  does  this  sentence  show  the  contrary.  For 
its  second  clause  is  explanatory  of  the  nature  and 
purport  of  the  vow  as  it  was  fulfilled.  The  end 
to  which  it  looked  was  the  very  thing  which  it  is 
stated  was  actually  secured,  that  she  should  know 
no  man.2  On  any  other  interpretation,  the  addi- 
tion of  this  clause  would  be  inexplicable  and  ques- 
tionable. For  the  fact  that  she  was  a  virgin  in  her 
father's  house,  has  already  been  twice  brought  for- 
ward. Moreover,  it  is  surely  not  an  event  of  very 
rare  occurrence,  for  young  women  to  die  before 
they  are  married.  And  why  should  the  narrator 
have  hesitated  to  speak  of  the  transaction  in  such 
terms  as  properly  and  plainly  described  it  ?  In 
other  cases  he  does  not  fail  to  speak  of  the  most 
fearful  aberrations  just  as  they  are.  The  truth  is, 
the  whole  narrative  derives  its  mighty  charm  only 
from  the  mysterious,  and  at  that  time  in  Israel 
very  extraordinary  fact,  that  the  daughter  of  the 
great  hero,  for  whom  a  life  of  brilliant  happiness 
opened  itself,  spent  her  days  in  solitude  and  vir- 
ginity.8    Death,  even  unnatural,  was  nothing  un- 

The  women  of  the  passages  alluded  to  are  therefore  not 
ministering  women,  but  persons  who  collected  together  at  the 
tabernacle  for  purposes  of  prayer,  requests,  and  thanks- 
giving, like  the  wives  of  Elkanah  (1  Sam.  i.),  or  to  consult 
with  and  inquire  of  the  priests.  Some,  of  course,  were  more 
instant  and  continuous  in  their  attendance  than  others  (cf. 
Kimchi  on  1  Sam.  ii.  22).  At  all  events,  they  were  women 
who  were  either  married  or  widowed.  But  the  history  of 
Jephthah's  daughter  is  related  as  something  extraordinary. 
Her  virginity  must  remain  intact.  On  this  account  she  is  la 
mented,  and  a  festival  is  celebrated  for  her  sake.  These  are 
uncommon  matters,  not  to  be  harmonized  with  the  idea  of  a 
familiarly  known  institute.  Even  among  the  Talmudists,  a 
female  ascetic  is  a  phenomenon  unheard  of  and  unapproved 
{Sola,  22  a). 

8  Nor  is  it  necessary  to  assume  anything  more  to  explain 
the  lament  of  the  daughter  or  the  grief  of  the  bereaved 
father.  Even  Roman  fathers  took  it  sorrowfully,  when  their 
daughters  became  vestal  virgins,  notwithstanding  the  ert-a' 


CHAPTER   XII.    1-7. 


177 


common.  But  a  life  such  as  Jephth;ih's  daughter 
henceforth  lived,  was  at  that  time  unparalleled  in 
Israel,  and  affords  therefore  profound  instruction, 
not  to  be  overlooked  because  issuing  from  the 
silence  of  retirement. 

Jephthah  performs  his  vow.  That  which  comes 
to  meet  him,  even  when  it  proves  to  be  his  daugh- 
ter, he  consecrates  entirely  to  God,  as  a  true  offer- 
ing of  righteousness   (cf.   Ps.  li.  21  :    PlrprpT 

VbST  rh^V).  He  fulfills  his  vow  so  fully  as  to 
put  it  beyond  his  own  reach  to  annul  or  commute 
its  purport.  For  he  fulfills,  as  he  vowed,  volun- 
tarily ;  no  one  called  on  him  to  make  his  promise 
good.  The  background  of  the  history,  without 
which  it  cannot  be  understood,  is  life  in  and  with 
God.  The  providence  to  which  the  hero  commits 
the  definition  of  his  vow,  is  that  of  Jehovah.  And 
it  ( tod  leads  his  daughter  forth  to  meet  him,  and 
tint:-  in  her  receives  the  highest  object  in  the  gift  of 
Jephthah,  the  consecration  of  which  she  becomes 
the  subject  cannot  be  of  a  nature  opposed  to  God. 

The  event  throws  a  brightness  over  the  life  of 
perpetual  virginity  which  rescues  it  from  ignominy 
and  dishonor.  Jephthah 's  daughter  typically  exem- 
plifies the  truth  that  a  virgin  life,  if  it  be  consecra- 
ted to  God,  is  not  such  an  utter  abnormity,  as  until 
then  it  had  appeared.  In  Jephthah's  fulfillment 
of  his  vow  and  the  consequent  unmarried  life  of 
his  daughter,  there  is  a  foreshadowing  of  those 
evangelical  thoughts  by  means  of  which  the  Apos- 
tle liberates  woman  from  the  dread  of  remaining 
nnwedded.  Not,  however,  that  we  are  to  look  here 
for  the  germ  or  type  of  the  nunnery  system  ; 1  but 
for  an  example  of  belonging  wholly  to  God,  and 
of  living  unmarried,  without  being  burdened  or 
placed  in  a  false  position. 

That  Jephthah  through  his  vow  became  the 
occasion  of  such  an  example,  is  already  some  miti- 
gation of  his  fate.  He.  has  become  the  father,  not 
of  children  who  inherited  his  house,  but  of  count- 
less virgins  who  learned  from  his  daughter  to 
remain  free  and  wholly  devoted  to  God.  Jephthah 
is  a  truly  tragic  hero.  His  youth  endures  perse- 
cution. His  strength  grows  in  exile.  His  victory 
and  fame  veil  themselves  in  desolation  when  his 
only  daughter  leaves  his  home.  But  everywhere 
he  is  great.  Whatever  befalls,  he  comes  out  con- 
queror at  last.  God  is  always  the  object  of  his 
faith.  He  suffers  more  than  Gideon  ;  but  what  he 
does  at  last  does  not  become  a  snare  to  Israel.  He 
also  had  no  successors  in  his  office  of  wisdom  and 
heroism — just  as  Gideon,  and  Samson,  and  Sam- 
honor  of  such  a  vocation.  They  were  glad  to  leave  such 
honors  to  the  children  of  freedmen  (Sueton.  Aug.  31 ;  Dio 
Cass.  55,  p.  563). 

1  On  this  point,  compare  my  article  in  Herzog,  p.  474, 
note. 

2  Poets,  unfortunately,  have  almost  without  exception 
considered  a  sacrificial  death  more  poetical,  and  have  thus 
done  serious  injustice  to  the  memory  of  Jephthah.  It  was 
done,  among  others,  by  Dante  (Paradise,  v.  661,  who  herein 


uel  had  none ;  but  it  was  not  his  fault  that  he  had 
them  not.  His  daughter,  who  resembled  a  Miriam, 
gave  herself  up  to  God.2 


HOMILKTICAL    AND   PRACTICAL. 

Jephthah's  call  was  extraordinary  :  extraordi- 
nary also  is  the  manner  of  his  own  endurance  and 
his  daughter's  obedience.  He  parts  with  her, 
though  deeply  afflicted.  He  yields,  though  pos- 
sessed of  secular  power.  His  daughter  comforts 
him,  though  herself  the  greatest  loser.  Isaac  did 
not  know  that  he  was  to  be  the  sacrifice;  but 
Jephthah's  daughter  knows  it,  and  is  content. 

1 .  Thus  it  appears  that  a  child  who  loves  its 
father,  can  also  love  God.  In  true  devotion  ol 
children  to  parents,  there  lies  a  germ  of  the  like 
relation  to  God.  The  daughter  of  Jephthah  loves 
her  father  so  dearly,  that  for  his  sake  she  calmly 
submits  to  that  which  he  has  vowed  to  God.  It  is 
written  :  Honor  thy  father  and  mother,  that  thy 
days  may  be  long  in  the  land  which  the  Lord 
thy  God  giveth  thee.  To  Jephthah's  daughter  this 
was  fulfilled  in  the  spirit  Her  memory  has  never 
faded  from  the  books  of  Israel,  nor  from  the  heaven 
of  God,  where  all  sorrows  are  redeemed. 

2.  Jephthah  might  have  conquered  without  a 
vow  ;  but  having  vowed  before  his  victory,  he  ful- 
fills it  after  the  same.  Faithfulness  to  his  word  is 
man's  greatest  wisdom,  even  though  he  moisten  it 
with  tears.  Faithfulness  towards  a  sin  is  inconceiv- 
able ;  because  unfaithfulness  lies  in  the  nature  of 
sin.  Faithfulness  has  the  promise  :  be  thou  faith- 
ful unto  death,  and  I  will  give  thee  the  crown  of 
life. 

3.  Jephthah's  daughter  does  not  die  like  one 
sacrificed  to  Molech :  she  dies  to  the  world.  She 
loses  a  thousand  joys  that  are  sweet  as  love.  But 
no  one  ever  dies  to  the  world  and  lives  to  God, 
without  experiencing  sorrow.  A  virgin  life  is  a 
nameless  life,  as  Jephthah's  daughter  is  nameless 
in  Scripture.  But  the  happiness  of  this  world  is 
not  indispensable ;  and  like  the  solitary  flower,  the 
unmarried  woman  can  belong  to  her  God,  in  whose 
heaven  they  neither  give  nor  are  given  in  mar 
riage. 

Geklach  :  That  the  Judges  whom  God  raised 
up,  when  they  thus  offered  to  the  Lord  even  that 
which  they  held  most  dear,  did  not  deliver  the  es- 
tranged and  deeply  fallen  people  in  a  merely  out- 
ward sense,  is  shown  by  this  act  of  believing  sur- 
render. 

followed  the  Catholic  exegesis  of  his  day  (cf.  my  article  in 
Herzog,  p.  470).  To  be  sure,  Herder  did  the  same.  Lord 
Byron  also,  in  his  Hebrew  Melodies  (see  a  translation  of  his 
poems  in  Klein's  Volhshattnder,  for  1854,  p  47).  The  names 
in  Handel's  Oratorio  seem  to  have  been  borrowed  from  ths 
poem  of  Buchanan,  published  in  Strasburg,  1568.  Cf. 
Godeke,  Pamp/iilus  GengenbacK,  p.  672.  In  Faber's  Hit- 
torischer  Luslgarten  (Augsburg  and  Frankfort,  1702),  the 
daughter  is  called  t(  Jephtina." 


Etphraim's  proud  and  envious  conduct  towards  Jephthah. 
Chapter    XIT.  1-7. 


I        And  the  men  of  Ephraim  gathered  themselves  together,  and  went  northward  [pro 
ceeded  to  Zaphon],  and  said  unto   Jephthah,  Wherefore  passedst  thou  over  [Why 


12 


178 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


didst  thou  pass  on  —  proceed— ]  to  fight   against  the  children   [sons]  of  Amnion,  and 

2  didst  not  call  us  to  go  with  thee  ?  we  will  burn  thine  house  upon  thee  with  fire.  And 
Jephthah  said  unto  them,  I  and  my  people  were  at  great  strife  [in  a  severe  conflict] 
with  the  children  [sons]  of  Amnion  ;  and  when  [omit :  when]  I  called  you,  [and]  ye 

3  delivered  me  not  out  of  their  hands  [hand].  And  when  I  saw  that  ye  delivered  i/ie 
not,  I  put  my  life  in  my  hands  [hand],  and  passed  over  [on]  against  the  children 
[sous]  of  Amnion,  and  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  delivered  them  into  my  hand  :  where- 

4  fore  then  are  ye  come  up  unto  me  this  day,  to  fight  against  me  ?  Then  [And] 
Jephthah  gathered  together  all  the  men  of  Gilead,  and  fought  with  Ephraim  :  and 
the  men  of  Gilead  smote  Ephraim,  because  they  [had]  said,  ye  Gileadites  are  fugi- 
tives of  Ephraim   among  the  Ephraimites,  and  among  the  Manassites   [fugitives  of 

5  Ephraim  are  ye  Gilead,  in  Ephraim  and  Manasseh],  And  the  Gileadites  took  the 
passages  [fords]  of  [the]  Jordan  before  the  Ephraimites  [toward  Ephraim]  :  and  it 
was  so,  that  when  those  Ephraimites  which  were  escaped  [the  fugitives  of  Ephraim], 
said,  Let  me  go  over ;  that  the  men  of  Gilead  said  unto  him,  Art  thou  an  Ephraimite  ? 

6  If  he  said,  Nay  ;  Then  said  they  unto  him,  Say  now  Shibboleth  :  and  he  said  Sibboleth  : 
for  he  could  not 1  frame  to  pronounce  it  right.  Then  they  took  him  and  slew  [slaugh- 
tered] him  at  the  passages  [fords]  of  [the]  Jordan.    And  there  fell  at  that  time  of  the 

7  Ephraimites  forty  and  two  thousand.  And  Jephthah  judged  Israel  six  years  :  then 
died  Jephthah  the  Gileadite,  and  was  buried  in  one  of  the  cities  of  Gilead. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  6.  —  (t  Could  not,"  is  too  strong.     K i:ii. :       }^3n,  stands  elliptically  for  ^  V   "P^n,  to  apply  the  mind,  tc 
give  heed.     Cf.  1  Sam.  xxiii.  22  ;  1  Chr.  xxviii.  2,  with  2  Chr.  xii.  14  ;  xxx.  19."  —  Tk.] 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

The  victory  of  Jephthah  is  followed  by  a  repeti- 
tion of  what  took  place  after  Gideon's  heroic 
achievement.  The  overbearing  pride  of  the  chief 
tribe,  Ephraim,  vents  itself  in  each  instance  against 
the  victor  who  has  risen  up  within  the  smaller 
tribe,  and  has  become  the  saviour  of  the  people. 
Now  as  then  the  presumptuous  jealousy  of  the 
tribe  complains  that  it  has  not  been  invited  to  take 
part  But  this  apparent  eagerness  for  war  was 
hypocritical.  The  thing  really  desired  was  a  share 
in  the  booty  and  the  results  of  success.  Ephraim 
would  help  to  reap,  where  it  had  not  sown.  The 
injustice  of  the  tribe  was  even  greater  on  this  occa- 
sion than  in  the  time  of  Gideon.  For  then  it 
really  did  render  some  little  assistance,  albeit  only 
after  Gideon  had  first  led  the  way.  But  here  it 
had  been  called  on  for  help,  and"  had  stayed  at 
home.  As  soon,  however,  as  victory  had  been  ob- 
tained, it  came  with  threats  and  war.  But  it  was 
not  so  successful  now  as  with  Gideon.  That  hero, 
when  they  clamored  against  him,  was  still  in  pur- 
suit of  the  enemy,  and  was  obliged,  for  the  sake 
of  his  own  success,  to  allay  their  pride  and  pre- 
sumption by  gentleness.  Jephthah  had  no  reason 
for  submitting  to  such  arrogance.  Nor  did  the 
Ephraimites  come  with  words  only ;  they  were  pre- 
pared to  use  force.  They  derided  the  people,  and 
thought  that  with  arms  in  their  hands  they  could 
chastise  Gilead  and  humble  Jephthah.  They  will 
set  his  house  on  fire  over  his  head.  Then  Jephthah 
shows  that  he  is  not  only  a  hero  against  enemies, 
but  also  the  Judge  in  Israel.  It  is  his  authority 
which  he  tries  and  proves  by  chastising  Ephraim. 
Hut  here  also,  as  in  his  dealings  with  the  sons  of 
Amnion,  he  first  establishes  the  righteousness  of 
hi-  conduct  by  clear  words.  However,  if  sinful 
Ephraim  had  cared  for  righteousness,  it  would  in 
io  case  have  entered  on  this  course.  It  relied  on 
riolence,  like  Ammon  ;  and  like  Ajnmon  it  experi- 
enced the  chastisement  of  violence.     No  Judge  of 


whom  the  history  tells  us  inflicts  such  chastisement 
and  exercises  such  power  within  the  nation  as  well 
as  against  alien  enemies,  as  does  Jephthah.  But 
it  was  needed ;  and  the  humiliation  of  Ephraim 
for  its  sin  was  less  severe  than  it  might  otherwise 
have  proved,  because  the  punishment  came  in  the 
time  of  Israel's  freedom,  and  not  at  the  expense 
of  that  freedom. 

Ver.  1.  And  proceeded  to  Zaphon.  The  older 
Jewish  expositors,  whom  Ewald  and   Keil   have 

followed,  already  found  in  n2"12^J,  not  direction 
toward  the  north,  but  the  name  of  a  city,  which 
lay  beyond  the  Jordan  in  the  tribe  of  Gad  (Josh, 
xiii.  27).  This  interpretation  rests  on  the  require- 
ments of  the  context.  For  in  order  to  explain 
verses  4  and  5,  Ephraim  must  have  advanced  across 
the  Jordan.  The  remark  in  the  Jerusalem  Tal- 
mud (Skwiith,  9,  2),  which  identifies  Zaphon  with 

VTOJ?,  Amathus,  Aemath,  cf.  Amateh  (cf.  Ritter, 
xv.  1031),  is  therefore  altogether  suitable.  For 
this  city  was  still  known  in  later  times  as  a  strong 
point  on  the  Jordan,  as  Josephus  repeatedly  states. 
The  Onomasticon,  also  (ed.  Parthey,  p.  26),  says 
concerning  it,  that  it  lay  beyond  the  Jordan,  to 
the  south  of  Pella ;  for  Ritter's  oversight,  who 
supposes  that  the  Onomasticon  identifies  Amathus 
with  another  Aemath  in  the  tribe  of  Reuben,  is 
not  to  be  concurred  in.  Amathus,  according  to 
its  stated  distance  from  Pella  (in  vigesimo  primr. 
milliario),  could  not  lie  in  the  tribe  of  Reuben  — 
which  agrees  so  far  with  the  fact  that  Zaphon  was 
in  Gad. 

Ver.  2.  And  Jephthah  said  unto  them.  It 
was  not  related  above  that  Jephthah  called  on  the 
tribe  of  Ephraim  to  assist,  as  he  here  reminds 
them ;  but  that  he  would  do  so,  was  to  be  expected. 
But  even  if  he  had  not  done  so,  what  was  there  lu 
justify  Ephraim  in  its  contention  and  war  !  Jeph- 
thah's  answer  is  not  defiant :  it  allows  that  Gilead 
would  gladly  have  accepted  help,  if  only  a  helper 
had  been  at  hand.     Jephthah  would  gladlj  hav« 


CHAPTER  XII.   1-7. 


17! 


fielded  the  precedence  in  victory  to  Ephraim,  if 
Ephraim  had  only  wielded  arras  against  the  enemy 
as  bravely  as  it  now  uses  words  against  its  brethren. 
But  when  he  saw  that  there  was  no  deliverer,  he 
put  his  life  in  his  hand,  and  God  gave  the  victory. 
Did  not  Jephthah  devote  his  dearest  possession  in 
order  to  obtain  from  God  the  victory  for  which  he 
entreated  Him  ? 

The  Midrash  has  a  thought  in  this  connection, 
which,  when  disengaged  from  its  unhistorical  wrap- 
pings, is  judicious  and  profound.  It  says  that  for 
the  things  which  befell  Israel  under  Jephthah  only 
the  priests  were  to  blame.  Why  did  they  not 
annul  the  vow  of  Jephthah  !  Why  did  they  not 
restrain  Ephraim  from  civil  war  !  It  is  manifest 
that  a  truth  is  here  suggested  which  applies  to  all 
times.  It  is  undoubtedly  the  duty  of  persons 
equipped  with  spiritual  power,  to  lift  up  their  voices 
for  peace,  and  especially  to  labor  for  concord  be- 
tween the  single  tribe  and  all  Israel.  If  they  neg- 
lect this  duty,  their  candlestick  —  this  also  the 
Midrash  intimates  —  will  sooner  or  later  be  over- 
thrown. 

Ver.  3  Wherefore  then  are  ye  come  up  unto 
me  this  day  to  fight  against  me  ?  Ephraim's 
attempt  is  actually  more  culpable  than  Ammon's. 
In  itself  considered,  civil  war  between  cognate 
tribes  is  a  disgrace,  which  can  only  spring  from 
ungodliness.'  But  the  sin  of  Ephraim,  when  it 
proposes  to  burn  the  house  of  Jephthah,  is  still 
further  aggravated  by  the  fact  that  it  is  directed 
against  the  restorer  of  the  divine  law  and  the  de- 
liverer of  Israel.  It  is  moral  and  national  treason. 
The  Spartans  also,  under  all  sorts  of  pretext*,  had 
left  Athens  to  face  alone  the  advancing  Persians. 
But  when  the  battle  at  Marathon  had  been  won, 
the  auxiliary  troops  who  arrived  too  late  to  be  of 
service,  praised  and  applauded  the  heroism  of 
Athens  (Herod,  vi.  120).  Jephthah  dwells  on  the 
injustice  of  Ephraim,  who  would  not  indeed  tight 
against  Ammon,  but  now  ("  this  day  ")  undertakes 
to  make  war  on  him  (he  always  stands  personally 
for  his  people),  in  order  to  excuse  his  armed  resist- 
ance. Ephraim  now  receives  the  punishment  which 
properly  it  had  already  deserved  at  Gideon's  hands. 
It  is  totally  defeated  by  the  hero;  and  its  men  find 
themselves  entered  on  a  calamitous  flight. 

Vers.  4,  5.  And  the  men  of  Gilead  smote 
Ephraim.  It  was  not  Jephthah,  as  the  fine  repre- 
sentation gives  us  to  remark,  who  prosecuted  the 
bloody  pursuit.  He  contented  himself  with  chas 
tising  Ephraim  according  to  its  presumption  ;  but 
the  people  of  Gilead  had  been  exasperated  by  the 
contempt  of  the  Ephraimites.  It  is  true  that  the 
sentence  in  which  the  ground  of  the  wrath  of  the 
Gileadites  over  an  utterance  of  the  Ephraimites  is 

expressed,   is   not   easily   expounded :    *1~^^    N2 

ornBN  tpna  "rsba  OCiH  n-n^si  ^bs 

!T"2J;  Tpna.  For  it  is  not  at  once  apparent 
how  the  Gileadites  could  be  called  "fugitives  of 
Ephraim,"  seeing  they  were  descendants  of  Manas- 
seh. A  closer  inspection,  however,  makes  this  in- 
telligible. Ephraim  raised  a  claim  to  participate 
in  war,  only  in  the  cases  of  Gideon  and  Jephthah, 
not  in  those  of  the  other  Judges.  It  is  manifest, 
therefore,  that  it  based  its  claim  upon  the  fact  that 
Gideon  and  Jephthah  belonged  to  Manasseh,  its 
own  sister-tribe.  At  any  rate,  the  House  of  Joseph, 
Ephraim  and  Manasseh,  had  from  of  old  a  con- 
sciousness of  a  certain  unity  of  its  own.  It  treated 
is  one  with  Joshua  (Josh.  xvii.  14  ft".).  It  entered 
.ogether  into  Its  territory  (Judg.  i.  22).     Under 


king  Solomon  it  was  under  a  common  administra- 
tive officer  (1  Kgs.  xi.  2S).  Now,  in  the  "  House 
of  Joseph  "  Ephraim  had  the  chief  voice  ;  for  Ma 
nasseh  was  divided,  and  its  possessions  lay  scattered 
among  other  tribes.  Hence,  it  could  with  some 
plausibility  claim  it  as  its  right  that  no  division  of 
the  House  of  Joseph  should  undertake  a  warlike 
expedition  without  its  participation.  Nor  do  Gid- 
eon and  Jephthah  deny  this  right.  "  We  did  call 
thee,"  says  the  latter  ;  "  but  thou  didst  not  come." 
Only  the  manner  in  which  Ephraim  raised  its 
claim  was  sinful,  unjust,  and  arrogant.  For  it 
raised  it,  not  in  the  time  of  distress,  but  for  the 
sake  of  the  booty;  and  instead  of  applauding  a 
great  achievement,  it  indulged  in  derision,  which 
exasperated  the  warriors  of  Gilead.  For  in  storm- 
ing at  Jephthah  for  not  calling  it,  it  denies  to  Gil- 
ead every  right  of  separate  action.  "  How  can 
Gilead  presume  to  exercise  tribal  functions,  and 
set  a  prince  and  judge  over  Israel  ?  "  "  Gilead  is 
no  community  at  all,"  but  only  a  "  set  of  fugitives," 
who  act  as  if  they  were  a  tribe,  whereas  in  fact 
they  belong  elsewhere.  They  use  the  word  peletim 
(fugitives)  by  way  of  contumely,  just  as  among 
the  Greeks  ipvyds  meant  both  fugitive  and  ban- 
ished- Ye  are  "  fugitives  of  Ephraim,"  taunted  the 
Ephraimites,  and  would  set  yourselves  up  as  an 
independent  principality.  In  so  saying,  Ephraim 
arrogantly  put  itself  in  the  place  of  the  House  of 
Joseph,  to  which  Gilead  also  belonged,  since  it  was 
the  son  of  Maehir  of  Manasseh.  "  Gilead  belongs 
in  the  midst  of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh."  This 
addition  was  intended  to  add  point  to  what  pre- 
ceded. Gilead  is  nothing  by  itself,  has  no  tribal 
rights ;  it  belongs  to  the  House  of  Joseph.  This 
was  true,  indeed;  and  Gilead's  descendants  lived 
on  both  sides  of  the  river  (Num.  xxvi.  30  ff.) ;  but 
"  fugitives  "  they  were  not.  The  half-tribe  of  Ma- 
nasseh beyond  "the  Jordan  was  as  independent  as 
any  other  tribe  ;  and  in  the  war  against  Amnion 
Gilead  proper  was  doubtless  joined  by  men  of  other 
tribes,  especially  Gad.  It  was  therefore  no  wonder 
that  the  men  of  Gilead  became  greatly  exasperated, 
and  did  not  spare  the  Ephraimites  even  in  theii 
flight.  Jephthah  only  defeated  them  ;  but  the  mul 
titude  slew  them  like  enemies,  and  gave  no  quarter. 
Thus,  sin  and  contumely  beget  passion  and  cru- 
elty. The  discord  of  brethren  inflicts  the  deepest 
wounds.  Nowhere  does  hatred  rise  higher,  than 
where  concord  is  natural. 

Ver.  6.  Then  said  they  to  him,  Say  Shib- 
boleth. Ephraim  meets  with  remarkable  expe- 
riences at  the  fords  of  the  Jordan.  In  Gideon's 
time,  it  gained  easy  victory  there  over  the  Midian- 
ites  whom  that  hero  chased  into  their  hands  ;  now 
it  is  itself  chased  thither  and  there  put  to  death 
In  the  outset,  its  men  had  taunted  Gilead  with  the 
term  "  fugitives  of  Ephraim,"  and  now  they  are 

themselves  in  very  truth  0^9fc?   ''©V?.  Before 

they  prided  themselves  upon  their  tribe  name  Eph- 
raim, which  they  haughtily  used  for  the  whole 
House  of  Joseph  ;  and  now,  when  an  Ephraimite 
came  to  the  stream,  he  is  fain  to  deny  his  tribe  in 
order  to  save  his  life.  The  enraged  men  of  Gilead 
will  not  suffer  one  Ephraimite  to  cross  the  river; 
hence  the  requisition  of  every  one  who  wished  to 
pass  over,  to  say  Shibboleth,  which  no  Ephraimite 
could  do,  for  he  could  only  say  Sibboletn.  What 
"  Shibboleth  "  meant,  is  of  minor  importance ;  but 
as  its  enunciation  was  required  at  the  river,  and  in 
order  to  pass  it,  it  may  be  assumed  that  the  Gilead- 
ites thought  rather  of'  the  signification  "  stream 
than  "  ear,"  both  of  which  the  wr  'd  has.     Evep 


180 


THE   BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


Ephraimite  in  this  extremity  had  the  feeling  after- 
wards depicted  in  the  Psalm  (lxix.  3  [2] ) :  "  I  am 
tome  into  depths  of  waters,  and  the  stream  over- 
Bows  me."  'OOBtatlJ  nVstn.  —  When,  during 
the  Flemish  war,  the  insurrection  against  the 
French  broke  out,  May  25.  1302,  the  gates  were 
guarded,  and  no  one  was  suffered  to  pass  out,  ex- 
cept such  as  were  able  to  say,  "  Salt  ende  friend," 
which  words  no  Frenchman  could  pronounce. 
( Mensel,  Gesch.  von  Frankr.  ii.  134  ;  Schmidt,  Gesch. 
"on  Frankr.  i.  682). 

And  there  fell  at  that  time  of  the  Ephraim- 
ites  forty  and  two  thousand.  The  number  42 
(7  times  6)  appears  to  be  not  far  removed  from 
around  number;  but  its  occurrence  is  associated 
with  severe  and  well-merited  judgments  on  sin. 
As  here  42,000  sinful  Ephraimites  fall,  so  42  of 
the  mockers  of  the  prophet  Elijah  are  killed  by 
bears  (2  Kgs.  ii.  24);  and  when  the  judgment  of 
God  breaks  forth  over  the  house  of  Ahab,  42  breth- 
ren of  Ahaziah  are  put  to  death  by  Jehu  (2  Kgs. 
x.  14). 

Ver.  7.  And  he  was  buried  in  one  of  the 
cities  of  Gilead.  Herein  the  mournful  lot  of 
Jephthah,  resulting  from  the  surrender  of  his 
daughter,  shows  itself.  He  had  no  heir,  as  he  had 
had  no  inheritance.  He  was  the  first  and  the 
last  in  his  house.  The  greatness  of  his  deeds  is 
proved  by  the  fact  that  they  were  nevertheless  re- 
membered ;  for  in  what  city  he  was  buried  was  not 
known,  just  as  to  us  Mizpah,  the  place  where  he 
had  his  home,  is  also  unknown,  and  as  the  place 
of  his  birth  is  not  mentioned.  It  is  not  known 
what  his  father's  name  was ;  it  is  not  known  where 
his  own  grave  is.  "  Gilead  "  begat  him,  and  Gil- 
ead received  his  corpse.  He  shares  no  father's 
tomb,  and  no  son  shares  his.  He  was  a  gnat 
hero  who  lived  and  died  solitary ;  only  faith  in 
God  was  with  him.  Six  years  he  ruled  ;  when 
thev  were  finished,  his  rest  from  labor  and  sorrow 
began.  His  name  did  not  return  ;  Gilead's  power 
rose  not  again  :  but  he  was  not  forgotten  in  Israel. 
His  sorrow  and  victory  are  typical  —  so  the  older 
expositors  suggest  —  of  Him  who  said  :  "  Not  my 
will,  but  thine,  be  done !  " 


HOUILETICAL    AND   PRACTICAL. 

Jephthah's  vocation  was  extraordinary,  and 
equally  extraordinary  was  his  fate.  He  gave  up 
everything  to  God  for  his  people  ;  and  yet  at  last 
the  envy  of  his  countrymen  pursues  him.  They 
threaten  to  burn  his  house,  which  for  their  sake  he 
has  made  desolate.  He  makes  no  boast  of  this, 
however  ;  yet  exercises  discipline  with  a  strong 
hand.  Six  years  he  judged,  and  in  the  seventh 
rested  from  "an  office  that  had  brought  him  so 
much  grief. 

1.  Prior  to  success  friends  are  few;  but  after- 
wards all  wish  to  share  in  it.  While  there  is  dan- 
ger, he  who  takes  the  lead  is  called  valorous ;  after 
the  victory,  usurper.  Sin  regards  not  the  offerings 
which  the' warrior  brings,  but  only  the  results  which 
ne  has  obtained.  The  evil  will  not  assist  in  sowing  ; 
but  yet  wonld  fain  participate  in  the  harvest. 

2.  Life  offers  nothing  to  such  as  serve  not  God, 
even   though  one   rise  as  high  as  Jephthah.     If 

1  [Dr.  Wordsworth  looks  on  Jephthah  as  '■  one  who  does 
Silghty  deeds  in  an  irrt^utar  manner,  at  a  time  when  those 
persons  who  are  placed  in  authority  by  God,  and  who  ought 
to  employ  God's  appointed  means  in  a  regular  way,  are  faith- 
less to  their  trust,  aud  neglect  their  duty  to  Go»'  and  his 
Church.     Uis  work  may  be  compared  to-  that  of  the  Wes- 


Jephthah  had  not  rebuilt  the  altar  of  Jehovah  in 
Israel,  he  had  been  happier  in  the  desert  and  the 
silence  of  seclusion.  The  charm  of  life  must  be 
sought  in  the  gospel.  Life  is  short ;  and  though 
prolonged,  full  of  trouble.  Every  religion  builds 
its  altar  for  eternity.  For  Him  who  has  wrought 
six  days  for  his  Saviour,  and  confessed  Him,  there 
opens  on  the  seventh  the  Sabbath  of  eternity. 

Starke  :  The  godly  are  never  long  without  a 
cross :  they  are  tried  at  home  and  abroad ;  with- 
out is  fighting,  within  is  fear  (2  Cor.  vii.  5). — 
Sailer  :  The  gospel  without  suffering  belongs  to 
heaven  ;  suffering  without  the  gospel,  to  hell ;  the 
gospel  with  suffering,  to  earth. 

[  Henry  :  It  is  an  ill  thing  to  fasten  names  or 
characters  of  reproach  on  persons  or  countries,  as 
is  common,  especially  on  those  who  lie  under  out- 
ward disadvantages ;  it  often  occasions  quarrels  of 
ill  consequences,  as  here.  See  likewise  what  a 
mischievous  thing  an  abusive  tongue  is.  —  Words- 
worth :  Here  we  see  a  specimen  of  that  evil 
spirit  of  envy  and  pride  which  has  shown  itself  in 
the  Church  of  God.  They  who  are  in  high  place 
in  the  Church,  like  Ephraim,  sometimes  stand 
aloof  in  the  time  of  danger.  And  when  others  of 
lower  estate  have  stepped  into  the  gap,  and  have 
stood  in  the  breach,  and  braved  the  danger,  and 
have  fought  the  battle  and  gained  the  victory,  as 
Jephthah  the  Gileadite  did  (the  man  of  Gilead, 
which  was  not  a  tribe  of  Israel),  then  they  are 
angry  and  jealous,  and  insult  them  with  proud 
words,  and  even  proscribe  and  taunt  them  with 
being  runaways  and  deserters,  and  yet  daring  to 
claim  a  place  among  the  tribes  of  Israel.  Has  not 
this  haughty  and  bitter  language  of  scorn  and  dis- 
dain been  the  language  of  some  in  the  greatest  west- 
ern church  of  Christendom  against  the  churches 
of  the  reformation  ?  Has  it  not  sometimes  been 
the  language  of  some  in  the  Church  of  England 
towards  separatists  from  herself?  Schism  doubt 
less  is  a  sin  ;  but  it  is  sometimes  caused  by  the  en 
forcement  of  anti-scriptural  terms  of  communion, 
as  it  is  by  the  Church  of  Rome  ;  and  the  sin  of  the 
schism  is  hers.  It  is  often  occasioned  (though  not 
justified)  by  spiritual  languor  and  lethargy  in  the 
Church  of  God.  Zeal  for  God  and  for  the  truth  is 
good  wherever  it  be  found.  Let  the  churches  of 
Christ  stand  forth  in  the  hour  of  danger  and  tight 
boldly  the  good  fight  against  the  Ammonites  of 
error  and  unbelief.  Then  the  irregular  guerrilla 
warfare  of  separatist 1  Jephthahs  and  their  Gilead- 
ites  will  be  unnecessary,  and  they  will  fight  side 
by  side  under  the  banner  of  Ephraim.  —  Tub 
same  :  The  Gileadites  did  not  slay  the  Ephraim- 
ites because  they  did  not  agree  with  them  in  pro- 
nunciation, but  "because  they  were  Ephraimites, 
which  was  discovered  by  their  different  pronuncia- 
tion. The  strifes  in  the  Church  of  God  lie  deeper 
than  differences  of  expression  in  ritual  observances 
or  formularies  of  faith.  They  lie  in  the  heart, 
which  is  depraved  by  the  evil"  passions  of  envy, 
hatred,  and  malice ;  and  slight  differences  in  ex- 
ternals arc  often  the  occasions  for  eliciting  the 
deep  rooted  prejudices  of  depraved  will,  and  the 
malignant  feelings  of  unsanctified  hearts.  Let  the 
heart  be  purified  by  the  Holy  Spirit  of  peace,  and 
the  lips  will  move"  in  harmony  and  love.  —  The 
same  :     That  river  which  in  the  days  of  Joshua 

leys  and  Whitefields,"  etc.  see  on  ch.  xi.  1.  The  definition 
ot  "  irregularity  "  here  given,  applies  to  all  the  Judges. 
In  a  certain  sense,  they  were  all  irregular ;  but  that  Jena 
thah  was  so  in  any  special  sense  is  abundantly  refuted  1>J 
Dr.  CasseUs  exposition. — Tr-1 


CHAPTER   XII.  8-15. 


181 


had  been  divided  bv  God's  power  and  mercy,  in 
order  that  all  the  tribes  might  pass  over  together 
into  Canaan,  the  type  i>."  heaven,  is  now  made  the 
scene  of  carnage  "between  Gilead  and  Ephraim. 
In  the  Church  <f  God,  the  scenes  of  God's  dearest 
love  have  often  been  made  the  scenes  of  men's 
bitterest  hate.  The  waters  of  baptism,  the  living 
waters  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  of  the  holy 


sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  —  these  "  passages 
of  our  Jordan  "  —  the  records  and  pledges  of  God's 
love  to  the  Israel  of  God,  have  been  made  the 
scenes  of  the  bitterest  controversies,  and  of  blood 
shed  of  brethren,  by  those  who  hear  the  name  of 
Christ.  The  holy  sepulchre  itself  has  been  mads 
an  aceldama.  —  Tb.] 


EIGHTH  SECTION. 


tHBEB   JUDGES   OF    UNEVENTFUL   LIVES     IN    PEACEFUL   TIMES:     IBZAN    OF    BETHLEHEM,   ELON   TH» 
ZEBULONITE,    AND   ABDON    THE    PIBATHONITE. 


lbzan  of  Bethlehem,  Elon  the  Zebulonite,  and  Abdon  the  Pirathonite. 
Chapter    XII.    8-15. 

8  9  And  after  him  lbzan  of  Beth-lehem  judged  Israel.  And  he  had  thirty  sons  |_,J 
and  thirty  daughters  whom  [omit :  whom]  he  sent  abroad  [sent  out,  i.  e.  gave  in  mar- 
riage], and  took  in  [brought  home]  thirty  daughters  from  abroad  for  his  sons :  and 

10  he  judged   Israel   seven   years.      Then  died    lbzan   [And   lbzan   died],  and  was 

1 1  buried  at  Bethlehem.     And  after  him  Elon,  a  [the]  Zebulonite,  judged  Israel,  and 

12  he  judged  Israel  ten  years.     And  Elon  the  Zebulonite  died,  and  was  buried  in 

13  Aijalon  in  the  country  of  Zebuhm.     And  after  him  Abdon  the  son  of  Hillel,  a  [the] 

14  Pirathonite,  judged  Israel.     And  he  had  forty  sons  and  thirty  nephews  [grandsons], 

15  that  rode  on  threescore  and  ten  ass  colts :  and  he  judged  Israel  eight  years.  And 
Abdon  the  son  of  Hillel  the  Pirathonite  died,  and  was  buried  in  Pirathon  in  the 
land  of  Ephraim,  in  the  mount  of  the  Amalekites  [Amalekite]. 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

The  special  value  of  the  notices  concerning  these 
three  Judges  consists  in  the  contrast  which  they  j 
offer  to  the  fortunes  of  Jephthah.  These  three  all 
have  what  Jephthah  had  not.  They  all  have  chil- 
dren in  abundance,  and  are  happy  in  them  (Ps. 
exxvii.  3  ft'.).  lbzan  has  thirty  daughters,  whom 
he  gives  in  marriage,  and  thirty  daughters-in-law. 
Abdon,  likewise,  has  forty  sons,  and  looks  on  thirty 
flourishing  grandsons.  The  people  is  familiar  with 
the  places  of  their  nativity,  and  knows  where  their 
sepulchres  are.  Indeed,  some  of  these  places,  even 
with  their  old  names,  are  not  lost  to  this  day. 
For  even  the  native  place  of  lbzan,  although  it 
was  not  the  celebrated  Bethlehem,  but  another  in 
Zebulun  (Josh.  xix.  15),  has  in  our  day  been  iden- 
tilied  as  Beit  Lahm  by  Robinson  (iii.  113).  Keifs 
icmark  that  we  are  not  to  think  here  of  the  Beth- 
lehem in  Judah,  must  indeed  be  allowed,  although 
the  Jewish  legend  does  think  of  it  and  identifies 
lbzan  with  Boaz.1  But  that  this  Bethlehem  al- 
wavs  appears  with  the  addition  "in  Judah"  (so 
also  in  Judg.  xvii.  7),  has  its  ground  in  the  very 
fact  that  the  other  Bethlehem  was  not  unknown. 

1  The  unhistorical  character  of  the  legend  is  the  more 
pvident,  the  more  clear  it  is  tLat  chapter  xii.  treats  only  of 
northern  heroes,  whereas  the  narratives  of  southeastern 
*eroes  and  struggles  begin  at  chapter  xiii.,  and  continue 
lown  to  Samuel  and  David. 


The  definition  "  in  Judah  "  could  here  be  the  less 
omitted  because  the  next  Judge  also  belonged  to 
Zebulun. 

Aijalon  also,  the  place  where  Elon,  the  second 
mentioned  Judge,  is  said  to  have  died,  and  where 
he  probably  also  resided,  seems  to  be  recognized  in 
Jaliin,  a  place  of  ruins  (cf.  Van  de  Velde,  referred 
to  by  Keil).  Pirathon,-  the  birthplace  of  the  third 
Judge,  whose  name  Hillel  is  a  highly  celebrated 
one  among  the  Jews  of  later  times,  was  already 
recognized  by  Esthor  ha-Parchi  in  the  modern 
Fer'ata  (iirWHE),  and  has  been  rediscovered  by 
Robinson  and  others  (cf.  Zunz,  in  Asher's  Benj.  of 
Ttidela,  ii.  426  ;  Robinson,  iii.  134).  They  all  en- 
joy in  fact  every  blessing  of  life  of  which  Jephthah 
was  destitute  ;"we  hear  of  their  children,  their 
fathers,  and  their  graves ;  but  of  their  deeds  we 
hear  nothing.  They  have  judged,  but  not  delivered. 
They  enjoyed  distinction,  because  they  were  rich  ; 
but  thev  never  rose  from  the  condition  of  exiled 
1  and  hated  men  to  the  dignity  of  princes,  urged 
thereto  by  the  humble  entreaties  of  their  country- 
men. Of  them,  we  know  nothing  but  theii 
wealth ;  of  Jephthah,  nothing  but  his  renown 
2  It  lies  on  a  Tell,  which  ver.  15  calls  the  mountain  of 
Anialek,  perhaps  from  Joshua,  the  conqueror  of  Aj  lalffc 
cf.  ch.  v.  14. 


182 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


They  had  herds,  but  made  no  sacrifices.  Their 
•laughters  were  married  ;  but  the  unmarried  daugh- 
ter of  Jephthah  survives  them  all  as  an  example 
of  the  obedience  and  faith  of  every  noble  maiden 
heart.  They  had  full  houses,  and  widely  known 
monuments ;  and  Jephthah  went  from  an  empty 
house  to  an  unknown  grave  :  but  his  name,  conse- 
crated by  the  Apostle's  benediction,  shines  for- 
evermore  as  that  of  a  hero  of  faith.  Such  con- 
trasts the  narrator  wishes  to  rescue  from  conceal- 
ment. The  heathen  Achilles,  according  to  the  le- 
gend of  the  Greeks,  chose,  immortal  fame  in  pref- 
erence to  length  of  life  and  pleasure.  What  would 
we  choose,  if  choice  were  given  us  between  Ibzan 
or  Hillel  and  Jephthah  ?  Or  rather,  let  us  Chris- 
tians choose  the  Cross  of  Him  who  lives  forever  ! 


HO.MILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

After  Gideon  and  Abimelech,  two  peaceful 
Judges  are  named,  concerning  whose  official  life 
nothing  is  reported.  A  similar  relation  subsists 
between  Jephthah  and  his  successors.  The  com- 
parison may  serve  for  instruction.  The  result  of 
Gideon's  deeds  was  glory  and  greatness  ;  of  Abim- 
elech's  tyranny,  terrors  and  punishment.  Both 
kind?  of  results  were  brought  to  view,  for  the 
insf  uction  of  the  nations,  in  the  career  of  Jeph- 
thah     His  victory  was  mighty  against  those  with- 


out ;  his  chastisement  towards  those  within.  Tin 
seed  which  he  sowed  in  tears,  sprang  up  in  joy  foi 
others. 

The  three  Judges  have  everything  that  Jephthah 
has  not, — children,  paternal  home,  and  commem- 
oration of  their  death.  But  they  have  no  heroic 
victory  like  his,  and  his  only  daughter  is  an  exam- 
ple for  all  time.  Jephthah  judged  only  a  short 
time,  and  died  bowed  down  with  grief  and  loneli- 
ness. But  neither  can  prosperity  avail  to  lengthen 
years.  These  peaceful  Judges  judged  only  seven, 
ten,  and  eight  years,  respectively.  How  different 
is  Jephthah 's  life  from  theirs!  But  the  kingdom 
of  God  does  not  move  onward  in  tragedies  alone, 
but  also  in  meekness  and  quietude. 

The  teachings  of  God  are  calculated  to  serve 
truth,  not  to  promote  human  glory.  Worldly  van- 
ity strives  for  the  immortality  of  time.  It  is  a 
strange  exhibition  of  human  folly,  when  great 
deeds  are  performed  for  the  sake  of  the  monuments 
and  statues  with  which  they  are  rewarded.  In  the 
kingdom  of  God,  other  laws  obtain.  Jephthah  is 
the  great  warrior  hero  ;  but  neither  the  place  of  his 
birth  nor  that  of  his  death  is  known.  Monuments 
determine  nothing  in  the  history  which  God  writes, 
hut  only  (Jodiike  deeds.  The  faithful  who  have 
died  in  God,  are  followed  by  their  works. 

Starke  :  It  is  better  to  bestow  celebrity  on  one's 
native  land,  by  virtuous  actions,  than  to  derive 
celebrity  from  one's  native  land. 


NINTH  SECTION. 


THE    OPPRESSION   OF   THE    PHILISTINES.      SAMSON,    THE    NAZARITE    JUDOS. 


Renewed  apostasy. 
Chapter  XIII.  1. 

1  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  did  evil  again  [continued  to  do  evil]  in  tne 
sight  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  ;  and  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  delivered  them  into  the 
hand  of  the  Philistines  forty  years. 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

The  same  fatal  history  repeats  itself  everywhere. 
Not  one  single  tribe,  the  Book  of  Judges  teaches 
us,  is  exempted  from  it.  Apostasy  is  constantly 
followed  by  subjection,  whether  it  be  inflicted  by 
eastern  or  western  neighbor-tribes.  It  is  writ- 
ten, ch.  ii.  14,  that  when  Israel  falls  into  sin,  it 
will  be  persecuted  by  all  the  nations  round  about. 
And  ch.  iii.  3  includes  the  "  five  princes  of  the  Phil- 
istines "  among  those  through  whom  Israel  is  to 
become  acquainted  with  distress  and  war.  The 
Hook  began  with  the  oppression  of  the  Mesopo- 
tamia!! king  in  tlie  east,  from  which  Othniel,  the 
hero  of  Judah,  liberated  the  people.  After  tracing 
a  circular  course  through  the  2ast  and  northeast, 
it  ends,   like  the  daily  course  of  the  sun,   in  the 


west ;  and  the  tribe  of  Judah,  with  which  the  nai 
rative  began,  is  again  brought  forward  at  its  close. 
As  for  back  as  ch.  x.  7,  in  connection  with  events 
after  the  death  of  Abimelech,  we  read  that  God 
"gave  Israel  up  into  the  hands  of  the  Philistines 
and  the  sons  of  Amnion."  The  heroic  achieve- 
ment of  Jephthah  against  Ammon  is,  however, 
first  reported.  (The  Judges  named  immediately 
afterwards  belong  to  northern  tribes,  two  to  Zebu- 
lun,  one  to  Ephraim.)  Now  the  writer  comes  tc 
speak  of  the  great  conflicts  which  Israel  had  tc 
wage  with  the  brave  and  well-equipped  people  of 
the  five  Philistine  cities  on  the  coast,  and  which 
with  varying  fortunes,  continued  to  the  time  of 
David.  The  tribes  especially  concerned  in  then: 
were  Dan,  the  western  part  of  Judah,  and  Simeon 
encircled  by  Judah.    How  changed  wer«  the  cimrs 


CHAPTER  XIII.  2-7. 


188 


Once,  the  men  of  Judah,  in  their  stormlike  career 
of  victory,  had  won  even  the  great  cities  on  the  sea- 
coast.  Afterwards,  they  were  not  only  unable  to 
maintain  possession  of  them,  but  through  their 
own  apostasy  from  God  and  the  genuine  Israel- 
iri>h  spirit,  became  themselves  dependent  on  them. 
Dan  had  already  been  long  unable  to  hold  its 
ground  anywhere  except  on  the  mountains  {ch.  i. 
34).  Now,  the  Philistines  were  powerful  and  free 
in  all  the  Danite  cities.  Chapter  x.  15  f.  tells  of 
the  earnest  repentance  of  the  sons  of  Israel  before 
God.  But  such  a  statement  is  not  made  here,  al- 
though the  history  of  a  new  Judge  is  introduced. 
Everywhere  else  the  narrative,  before  it  relates  the 
mighty  deeds  of  a  Shophet,  premises  that  Israel  had 
cried  unto  God,  and  that  consequently  God  had 
taken  pity  upon  them.  Now,  unless  it  be  assumed 
that  ch.  x.  15  refers  also  to  Dan  and  Judah,  as  in 
ver.  fi  the  Philistines  are  likewise  already  spoken 
of,  it  is  remarkable  that  the  narrative  of  Samson's 
exploits  is  not  preceded  by  a  similar  remark.  It 
is  a  point  worthy  of  special  notice.  For  since  the 
story  of  Israel's  apostasy  is  repeated,  that  of  its 
repentance  would  likewise  have  been  repeated. 
That  which  he  does  not  relate,  the  narrator  must 
have  believed  to  have  had  no  existence.  And  in 
fact  no  such  repentance  can  have  taken  place  at 
this  time  in  Dan  and  Judah,  as  we  read  of  in  Gil- 
tad.  The  history  of  the  hero,  whose  deeds  are 
about  to  be  related,  proves  this.  If,  then,  such  a 
mau  nevertheless  arose,  the  compassion  which  God 


thereby  manifested  toward  Israel,  was  doubtless 
called  forth  by  the  few,  scattered  here  and  there, 
who  sought  after  and  acknowledged  Him.  The 
power  which  shows  itself  in  the  history  of  Sam- 
son's activity  is  of  a  similarly  isolated,  individual 
character.  It  is  only  disconnected  deliverances 
which  Israel  receives  through  him.  It  is  no  entirt 
national  renovation,  such  as  were  brought  about 
by  former  Judges  within  their  fields  of  action. 
Herein  the  history  of  Samson  differs  entirely  from 
the  events  of  Othniel's,  Ehud's,  Barak's,  Gideon's, 
and  Jephthah's  times,  just  as  he  himself  differs 
from  those  heroes.  Jephthab  also  speaks  as  an 
individual  I,  when  he  treats  with  the  enemy;  he 
was  in  fact  the  national  I,  for  his  will  was  the  will 
of  the  people,  his  repentance  their  repentance.  He 
can  say,  "  I  and  my  people,"  (ch.  xii.  2)  :  his  people 
have  made  him  their  prince.  Samson  is  an  indi- 
vidual without  a  people ;  a  mighty  I,  but  no 
prince ;  a  single  person,  consecrated  to  God,  and 
made  the  instrument  of  his  Spirit  almost  without 
his  own  will ;  whereas  Jephthab  and  his  people  are 
one  in  penitential  disposition  and  trust  in  God. 
Hence,  the  circumstance  that,  although  Samson 
was  a  Judge,  and  announced  by  an  angel  of  God, 
it  is  nevertheless  not  recorded  that  before  his  ad- 
vent the  "  sons  of  Israel  had  cried  to  God,"  affords 
an  introductory  thought  important  for  the  right 
apprehension  of  the  peculiar  and  remarkable  nar- 
ratives in  which  the  new  hero  appears. 


An  angel  foretells  the  birth  of  Samson. 
Chapter  XIIL  2-7. 

2  And   there  was   a  certain  man  of  Zorah,  of  the  family  of  the  Danites,  whose 

3  name  was  Manoah ;  and  his  wife  was  barren,  and  bare  not.  And  the  [an]  angel 
of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  appeared  unto  the  woman,  and  said  unto  her,  Behold,  now, 

4  thou  art  barren,  and  bearest  not :  but  thou  shalt  conceive,  and  bear  a  son.  Now 
therefore  [And   now]  beware,  I  pray  thee,  and  drink  not  wine,  nor  strong  drink, 

5  and  eat  not  any  unclean  thing  :  For  lo,  thou  shalt  conceive,  and  bear  a  son  ;  and 
no  razor  shall  come  on  his  head  :  for  the  child  [boy]  shall  be  a  Nazarite  unto 
[of]  God  from  the  womb :  and  he  shall  begin  to  deliver  Israel  out  of  the  hand  of 

6  the  Philistines.  Then  [And]  the  woman  came  and  told  her  husband,  saying, 
A  man  of  God  came  unto  me,  and  his  countenance  [appearance]  was  like  the 
countenance  [appearance]  of  an  angel  of  God,  very  terrible  [august]  :  but  [and] 

7  I  asked  him  not  whence  he  was,  neither  told  he  me  his  name  :  But  [And]  he  said 
unto  me,  Behold,  thou  shalt  conceive,  and  bear  a  son;  and  now  drink  no  wine  nor 
strong  drink,  neither  eat  any  unclean  thing :  for  the  child  [boy]  shall  be  a  Naza- 
rite to  [of]  God  from  the  womb  to  the  day  of  his  death. 


EXEIiUVICAL   AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  2,  3.  And  there  was  a  certain  man  of 
Borah.  In  the  times  of  Israel's  penitence,  men 
-ose  up  filled  with  the  Spirit  of  God ;  when  this 
was  not  the  case,  God  had  to  bring  forth  the  hero 
for  himself.  Samson's  election  was  unlike  that  of 
any  other  Judge.  Concerning  Othniel  and  Ehud, 
t  is  simply  said,  "  and  God  set  them  up  as  deliver- 

irs"  (CiTl).    Barak  was  called  through  Deborah, 


who  was  a  prophetess.  An  "  angel  of  God  "  came 
also  to  liberate  the  people  from  Midian ;  but  he 
came  to  Gideon,  a  man  of  valor  already  proved. 
Jephthah's  case  has  just  been  considered.  The 
election  of  Samson  presents  an  altogether  different 
phase.  He  is  chosen  before  he  is  born.  An  angel 
of  God  comes,  not  to  him,  but  to  his  mother.  Jeph- 
thah  is  recognized  by  Gilead  as  the  right  man,  be- 
cause he  has  begun  (vP*)  to  triumph  over  the  en- 
emy.     In    Samson's   case,  it   i?  predicted   to  hi 


134 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


mother  that  her  son  " shall  begin "  iTT)  to  de- 
liver Israe1.. 

The  father  of  Samson  was  of  Zorah  (see  below 
on  ver.  25),  of  the   race  of  Dan;  whence  Samson 
is  also  called  Bedan  (1   Sam.  xii.  11).     He  bears 
the  beautiful  name  Manoah,  "  Rest,"  equivalent  to 
the  Greek "Hcruxos,  Hesyehius, —  a  name  sufficient- 
ly peculiar  for  the  father  of  so  restless  a  spirit  as 
Samson.    The  name  of  his  wife  is  not  given.    Jew- 
ish tradition  {Haha  Bathra,  91)  derives  her  from 
the  tribe  Judah,  and  with  reference  to  1  Chron.  iv. 
),  names  her  Zelelponi  or  Hazelelponi.  The  parents 
were  at  first  childless.     The  mother  was  barren,  as 
Sarah  was  before  her.    But  it  is  not  related  of  her, 
any  more  than  of  Sarah,  that  she  prayed  for  a  son. 
This  can  only  be  inferred  from  the  similar  instance 
of  Hannah  (1  Sam.  i.  10) ;  but  it  does  not  appear, 
that,  like  Hannah,  sh  ■  made  a  vow.    Nor  is  it  said 
of  her  and  Manoah  that  they  were  old,  as  in  the 
eases  of  Sarah  and  Elizabeth  (Luke  i.  7).     They 
were  pious,  uncomplaining  people,  who  lived  in 
retirement,  and  had  hitherto  borne  their  childless 
condition  with  trustful  resignation.     Nevertheless, 
it   was    this   childless    condition    that    peculiarly 
adapted  the  wife  for  the  right  reception  of  the  an- 
nouncement which  is  made  to  her.    The  jov  which 
it  inspires  prepares  her  fully  for  the  sacrifice  which 
it  requires.     It  holds  out  a  scarcely  hoped  for  hap- 
piness, which  she  will  gladly  purchase  with  the 
restraints  imposed  upon  her.  "  But  this  is  not  the 
only  ground  why  she  is  chosen.     An  announce- 
ment like  that  made  to  her  requires  faith  in  the  re- 
ceiver.   The  pious  disposition  of  the  parents  shows 
itself  in  this  faith,  by  which,  less  troubled   with 
doubt  than  Sarah  and  Zacharias,  they  receive  as 
certain  that  which  is  announced  to  them. 

Ver.  4.  And  now  beware,  I  pray  thee,  and 
drink  not  wine  nor  intoxicating  drink.  For 
Samson,  the  child  that  is  to  be  born  to  her,  shall  be 
a  "Nazir  of  God."  The  ideas  which  here  come  to 
light,  are  of  uncommon  instructiveness.  They  reveal 
a  surprisingly  free  and  discriminating  conception  of 
the  life  and  wants  of  the  Israel  of  that  time.  Far- 
reaching  thoughts,  which  still  influence  the  Chris- 
tian Church  of  our  own  day,  are  reflected  in  them. 
I.  The  law  of  the  Nazarite  and  his  vow,  in  Num. 
yi.,  rests  upon  the  great  presuppositions  which  are 
implied  in  Israel's  calling.  In  Ex.  xix.  6,  God  says 
to  Israel,  "  Ye  shall  be  unto  me  a  kingdom  of  priests, 
and  an  holy  nation;"  but  he  precedes  it  (ver.  5) 
by  the  words,  "  Ye  shall  be  a  possession  unto  me 
out  of  all  nations,  for  all  the  earth  is  mine."  All 
nations  are  God's ;  but  among  them,  Israel  was  to 
be  his  holy  people  ;  and  the  law  expresses  in  sym- 
bolic actions  the  moral  ideas  through  which  Israel 
exhibits  itself  as  holy  and  consecrated.  Within  the 
holy  nation,  the  priests  occupy  the  same  relation 
which  the  nation  holds  to  the  world.  Their  service, 
in  sacrifice,  prayer,  and  atonement,  expresses  es- 
pecially consecration  and  nearness  to  God.  More- 
over, with  respect  to  this  service  they  have  likewise 
a  law,  whose  external  command  represents  the  in- 
ternal idea  of  their  consecration.  The  command  to 
Aaron  is,  that  the  priests,  when  they  go  into  the  tab- 
iiiiaele.  are  not  to  drink  wine  nor  strong  drink,  in 
Jider  that  they  may  be  able  to  distinguish  between 
holy  and  unholy,  and  to  teach  the  children  of  Israel 
[Lev.  x.  9);  for  wine  is  a  mocker  (Prov.  xx.  1). 
Win..',  says  Isaiah,  with  reference  to  the  priesthood 


of  his  day  (ch.  xxviii.  7),  has  drowned  all  priestlj 
consecration.  The  consequences  of  intoxication 
show  themselves  not  only  in  a  man  like  Nabal  ( I 
Sam.  xxv.  36),  but  also  in  the  case  of  a  pious  man 
like  Lot. 

That  death  is  the  wages  of  sin,  the  Old  Testa- 
ment teaches  on  every  page.     The  priests  are  to 
abstain  from  wine,  lest  they  die.    Hence,  also,  they 
are  not  to  touch  a  corpse,  for  it  has  the  nature  of 
sin  and  uncleanness  (Lev.  xxi.  1),  and  the  priests- 
are  to  be  holy.     But  although  the  special  official 
priesthood  was  given  by  law  to  the  tribe  of  Levi, 
holiness  and  consecration  of  life  were  not  limited 
to  that  tribe  :  every  one,  no  matter  what  his  tribe, 
can  consecrate  himself  to  God,  and  without  the  aid 
of  office,  visibly  realize  the  general  priesthood  in  his 
own  person.     It  is  the  peculiarity  of  the  law,  that 
it   expresses  every  internal  religious  emotion  by- 
means  of  a  visible  act.     It  obliges  the  inward  life 
to  allow  itself  to  be  visibly  recognized.     All  Israel 
was  to  be  holy  ;  but  when  an  Israelite,  in  a  con- 
dition of  special  spiritual  exaltation,  rising  above 
the  common  connection  between  God  and  the  peo- 
ple, as  mediated  by  the  priests,  vowed  himself  to 
God,  this  act  also  was  made  the  subject  of  ordi- 
nances, by  which  the  Nazir,  as  he  who  thus  vowed 
was  called,  was  distinguished  from  other  men,  and 
held   to  special  obligations.     Hence,  an    Israelite 
can  vow  himself  to  God  for  a  time,  and  is  accord- 
ingly during  that  time  holy  to  God  in  an  especial 
sense  (Num.  yi.  8).     Without  holding  any  priestly 
office,  he  enters  into  a  free  and  sacred  service  before 
God.    Hence,  during  the  whole  time  of  his  vow,  he 
is  forbidden  to  touch  wine  or  strong  drink,  as  if  he 
were  constantly  officiating  in   the  tabernacle,  al- 
though the  priests,  when  not  actually  engaged  in 
service,  were  under  no  restraint.    The"  priests,  gen- 
erally forbidden  to  touch  a  corpse,  are  yet  allowed 
to  do  so  in  the  case  of  a  blood  relative  (Lev.  xxi. 
1  ft") ;  but  the  Nazir,  who  is  to  look  upon  himself 
as  if  he  were  ever  in  the  sanctuary,  from  which 
every  impurity  is  excluded,  is  not  to'  know  any  ex- 
ception.   He  may  not  touch  the  dead  body  of'even 
father  or  mother.     Yea,  he  is  himself,  as  it  were,  a 
temple  or  altar  of  God,  as  appears  from  the  per- 
sonal mark  by  which  he  is  distinguished.     The 
priest  comes  only  to  the  altar ;  and  is  forbidden  to 
wear  the  signs  of  the  idolaters  on  his  hair  and  beard 
(Lev.  xxi.  5),  and  is  moreover  distinguished  by  his 
clothing.     The  Nazir  is  in  the  congregation,  his 
clothing  is  not  different  from  that  of  others ;  but 
he  is  himself  an  altar;  and  therefore,  as  over  an 
altar,  so  over  his  body,  and  over  the  head  of  that 
body,   no  iron  may  be  lifted  up.     "  When  thou 
makest  an  altar  of  stone,"  says  Moses,  "  thou  shalt 
not  build  it  of  hewn  stone ;  "for  if  thou  lift  up  thy 
iron  '  upon  it,  thou  hast  desecrated  it "  ( Ex.  xx.  25). 
Accordingly,  Joshua  built  an  altar  of  stones  "  over 
which  no  man  had  lifted  up  any  iron  "  (Josh.  viii. 
31).     The  reason  for  this  prohibition  is  grounded, 
not  in  the  nature  of  stone,  but  in  the  symbolical 
significance  of  iron.   Iron,  as  the  Mishnah  observes 
{Middoth,  iii.  4),  must  not  even  touch  the  altar ;  for 
iron  is  used  to  shorten  lite,  but  the  altar  to  lengthen 
it  (comp.  my  treatise  Schamir,  pp.  57,  58).     It  is 
well   known  that  other  ancient  nations   regarded 
iron  in  the  same  way.     The  Egyptians  called  it 
"  Typhon's  Bones  "  (Plutarch,  de  Osirid.  cap.  lxii). 
Iron,  according  to  the  oracle  (Fausan.  iii.  3,4), 
is  the  image  of  evil,  because   it   is  used   in  bat- 


l  (The  Enilish    version    renders,    "tool."     The   word   is  I  is  justified  by  Josh.  viii.  81,  where,  with  evident  reference  U 
-7C,  'n  'he  sense  of '•chisel."   The  interpretation  "iron"    Es-  "■  25,   7T""!?  is  substituted  for  3~in,  —  Tb.'' 


CHAPTERS    XIII.  2-7. 


18c 


tie.1  When,  therefore,  it  was  enjoined  upon  the 
Nazir  to  let  no  knife  come  upon  his  head  during 
the  time  of  his  vow,  the  ground  of  the  injunction 
was  lujne  other  than  this  :  that  since  the  Nazir.  like 
the  altar,  is  holy  and  consecrate  to  God,  iron,  the 
instrument  of  death  and  terror,  must  not  touch 
him.'2 

The  Nazir  is  a  walking  altar  of  God ;  and  his 
flowing  hair  is  the  visible  token  of  his  consecration, 
reminding  botli  himself  and  the  people  of  the  sacred 
vows  he  has  assumed.  It  is  the  proper  mark  of  the 
Nazir,  as  the  linen  garment  is  that  of  the  Levite. 
By  it  he  is  known,  and  from  it  probably  comes  his 
name.  It  may  be  assumed  that  the  signification 
"  to  devote  one's  self,  to  abstain  from,"  of  the  verb 

"ITJi  belongs  to  it  only  in  consequence  of  the  dis- 
tinction attached  to  the  "'"'TJ.  It  seems  to  me  that 
A'azir  is  equivalent  to  Kapr)Kop6aiv,  long-haired,  Cin- 
sinnatus,  curly-haired,  or  Harfagr  (Haralld  hinn 
Harfagri).  For  it  has  been  justly  remarked  that  in 
Num.  vi.  the  term  Nazir  is  already  accepted  as  a 
familiar  expression.  It  may  be  compared  with  the 
Latin  cirrus,  curl,  lock,  or  tuft  of  hair  (ef.  aesaries 
=  cararies) ;  for  comparative  philology  shows  that 

in  most  verbs  beginning  with  -,  this  letter  is  a  spe- 
jifie  Hebrew  prefix  to  the  root,  so  that  ~^?3'  to 
guard,  to  keep,  may  be  compared  with  T-qpecu  ;  7122, 

to  bear,  with  r\dw;  ti'TO.  brass,  with  as:  tUTO, 
serpent,  with  the  onomatopoetic  zischen,  to  hiss ; 
DnD  with  gemrre ;  ?T1  -with  satire,  etc.  The  word 
".!■?  would  then  get  its  signification  diadem,  orna- 
ment (cf.  "IJ,  in  the  same  sense),  just  as  the  Greek 
kou.ho's,  derived  from  /coVrj,  i\ofiew,  comes  to  signify 
adornment.  To  trace  the  original  etymological 
identity  of  cirrus,  cicinnus,  and  the  Sanskrit  kikura, 
with  the  Hebrew  nazir,  or  to  inquire  whether  the 
terms  £i'»puu,eu,  to  shave  one's  self,  and  Ktipeiv,  to  cut 
the  hair,  are  connected  with  the  same  root,  would 
be  out  of  place  here.  Precisely  those  terms  which 
designate  objects  of  primitive  interest  to  man,  are 
most  deeply  imbedded  in  the  general  philological 
treasures  of  all  nations.  But  not  to  pursue  these 
speculations  any  farther,  it  must  already  appear 
probable,  that  the  use  of  nazir  in  Lev.  xxv.  5,  where 
it  is  applied  to  the  untrimmed  vine  of  the  sabbatic 
vear,  is  to  be  explained  by  reference  not  to  the 
Nazaritic  custom  of  human  beings,  vowing  and 
consecrating  themselves  to  God,  but  to  the  original 
meaning  of  the  root.  The  Sabbath-year  being  time 
belonging  to  God  (Lev.  xxv.  4),  no  knife  was  ap- 
plied during  its  course  to  the  vine,  which  from  that 
circumstance  was  named  nazir.  This  would  have 
been  an  unsuitable  designation,  if  it  had  been 
derived  from  the  vows  assumed  by  the  human 
Nazir;  for  such  subjective  activity  could  not  be 
ascribed  to  the  vine.  It  was  the  objective  appear- 
ance of  the  Nazir,  who,  whether  man  or  vine,  was 
holy,  and  therefore  had  not  been  touched  by  the 
knife,  which  gave  rise  to  the  name.  The  name 
suggests  the  unshaven  condition,  the  long  hair,  of 
the  Nazarite,  not  primarily  his  consecration,  al- 
-hough  the  sacred  character  of  the  person,  through 

1  The  following  is  said  to  have  been  uttered  by  Apollo- 
nius  of  Tyana :  fr  Let  the  iron  spare  the  hair  of  a  wise  man. 
For  it  is  not  right  that  it  should  touch  a  place  where  lie  the 
lources  of  all  the  senses,  whence  all  sacred  sounds  and  voices 
psue  and  praters  proceed,  and  the  word  of  wisdom  inter- 
prets ' — Pbilo«trut.,  Yit.  Apolion..  viii  6. 


the  law,  gave  sanctity  to  the  name  and  set  it  apart 
from  common  uses,  just  as  the  rite  of  circumcision 

was  indebted  for  its  name  (Hv^),  not  to  the  sac. 
ramental  character  of  the  rite,  but  to  the  mere  act 

of  cutting  OIO,  <r/j.iKw),  and  then  reflected  its  own 
sanctity  upon  the  name.  Long  hair,  although  with- 
out any  reference  to  the  Nazaritic  institute  it  may 

be  called  ~l>2  (cf.  Jer.  vii.  29),  was  the  proper  mark 
of  the  Nazir,  because  regularly  set  apart  for  this 
purpose  by  the  law.  To  sanctify  the  natural  life, 
is  the  very  thing  at  which  the  law  constantly  aims. 
By  its  institutions  its  spiritual  requisitions  are  ren- 
dered visible  and  personal.  The  circumcision  of  the 
foreskin  is  after  all  but  the  national  image  of  cir- 
cumcision of  the  heart,  and  the  Nazaritic  institute 
is  the  symbol  of  the  general  priesthood,  in  which 
no  sin  or  impurity  is  to  sully  the  free  service  of  God. 
But  the  visible  character  in  which  each  of  these 
conceptions  appeared,  was  more  than  a  subjective, 
mutable  image  :  it  wTas  a  definite  and  unchange- 
able law.  It  was,  to  a  certain  extent,  a  sacrament- 
It  is  instructive  to  see  how  the  relation  of  spirit  and 
law  aft'ects  Biblical  language  and  conceptions.  The 
wearing  of  long  hair,  a  purely  natural  act,  is  first, 
by  spiritual  ideas,  raised  into  an  expression  of  the 
general  priesthood,  in  which  man  is  a  living  altar  ; 
but  when  long  hair  has  become  characteristic  of  the 
sacred  Nazir,  whose  duty  it  is  to  keep  far  from  im- 
purity, a  new  verb  is  derived  from  his  name,  with 
the  sole  spiritual  signification  of  "  withholding  one's 
self  from  what  is  unclean."  The  same  process  may 
be  noted  in  connection  with  circumcision.  Origi- 
nally elevated  into  a  sacrament  by  the  intervention 
of  spiritual  ideas,  incorporated  into  the  law,  it 
affords  occasion  for  the  transfer  of  its  name  to  the 
spiritual  conceptions  of  the  circumcision  of  tongue 
and  heart.  But  especially  remarkable  is  the  appre- 
hension of  the  relation  between  spirit  and  law  in 
the  history  of  Samson. 

II.  Why  was  it  necessary  for  the  hero  who  should 
begin  to  deliver  Israel,  to  be  a  Nazir  ?  Why  was 
the  same  election  and  education  not  necessary  in 
the  cases  of  the  other  great  judges,  as,  for  instance, 
Gideon  and  Jephthah  ?  Were  then  those  heroes 
not  spiritual  Nazarites,  who  gave  their  lives  to  the 
service  of  God  ?  May  we  not  understand  the  open- 
ing words  of  Deborah's  Song  as  indicating  their 
spiritual  consecration  to  Jehovah  :  "  That  in  Israel 
waved  the  hair,  in  the  people's  self-devotion"  (see 
on  ch.  v.  2)  ?  No  doubt;  and  for  that  very  reason 
Samson  is  distinguished  from  them.  For  those 
men  arose  in  times  when  the  tribes  of  Israel  them 
selves  repented  and  turned  their  hearts  to  God.  In 
Samson's  day,  the  situation  was  different.  Dan  and 
Judah  were  oppressed,  but  not  repentant.  An  up- 
rising from  within  through  faith,  is  not  to  be  ex- 
pected. It  is  brought  about,  therefore,  as  it  were 
from  without,  by  means  of  the  law.  The  power 
of  the  objective,  spiritual  law  manifests  itself.  It 
becomes  an  organ  of  deliverance,  when  the  sub- 
jective source  of  freedom  no  longer  flows.  The 
angel  would  have  found  no  Gideon.  A  prophetess 
like  Deborah,  there  was  not.  But  the  law  abides  ; 
it  is  independent  of  the  current  popular  spirit.  It 
is  thus  the  last  sure  medium  through  which  the 
help  of  God  can  come  to  Israel.     This  significance 

i 

2  Hence,  we  cannot  agree  with  the  explanations  cited  and 
proposed  in  Oehler's  article  on  the  N«siranf,  in  Herzog's  En- 
tyklaparfie  (x.  208).  A  poem  by  .Max  Letteris,  on  the  "  Lockl 
jf  the  Nazarite,"  in  Jo'oivuz  BlUtlunkranz,  p.  239,  has  ei> 
tirely  missed  the  idea  of  the  *Bzaiitic  institution. 


186 


THE  BOCK  OF  JUDGES. 


Bf  the  law,  and  its  objective  power,  is  very  in- 
Itructively  set  forth  before  the  people  in  the  person 
of  Samson.     It  is  this  also  which,  from  Samson 
onward,  becomes  the  ruling  force  in  the  vocation 
And  appointment  of  deliverers,  until  the  kingship 
is  established,  which  by  the  objective  rite  of  priestly 
anointing,  changes  David  the  shepherd-boy   into 
David  the  victorious  ruler.     And  this  instruction 
concerning  the  law  as  a  whole,  is  imparted  through 
the  medium  of  the  special  law  concerning  the  Nazir, 
because  it  is  here  that  the  relation  to  be  pointed  out 
comes  most  clearly  to  new.     For  precisely  the  Na- 
zariteship  is,  according  to  the  Biblical  law",  the  out- 
flow of  unrequired,  voluntary  consecration  to  God 
on  the  part  of  an  individual.     No  doubt,  to  a  cer- 
tain extent,  the  earlier  heroes,  though  not  Nazar- 
ites   in   form,  were  such  self-devoted   men.     Bat 
heroes  such  as  they  do  not  arise  in  times  when  the 
absence  of  penitence  and  faith  dulls  the  prophets 
and  Nazarites  (cf.  Amos,  ii.  12).     Hence,  the  his- 
tory of  Samson  teaches  that  Israel  would  have  had 
nothing  to  hope  for  from  the  Nazariteship,  if  it  had 
had  no  other  than  subjective  validity.  When  faith  is 
wanting  among  the  people,  no  man  becomes  a  Na- 
zir ;  but  the  objective  law  can  make  of  the  Nazir,  a 
man.     In   Samson's  case,  the  Nazariteship  makes 
the  hero,  the  long  hair  characterizes  his  strength, 
the  renunciations   of   the  mother  consecrate   the 
child.    Samson,  a  Nazarite  from  his  birth  and  with- 
out his  own  will,  becomes  what  he  is  only  as  such, 
and  continues  to  he  a  hero  only  so  long  as  he  con- 
tinues to  be  a  Nazarite.     The  Nazariteship  is  first, 
everything  else  second,  in  him.    Its  power  over  him 
is  so  objective,  that  it  already  operates  on  him  be- 
fore he  is  born,  before  anything  like  free  conscious- 
ness can  be  thought  of.     The  command  addresses 
not  him  whom  it  concerns,  but  his  mother,  and  she, 
during  her  pregnancy,  becomes  a  female  Nazir,  in 
order  that  her  son  may  be  able  to  become  a  hero. 
It  is  this  that  properly  distinguishes  Samson  from 
the  other  heroes ;  and  its  occasion  appears  in  the 
fact  that  the  narrator  could  not,  as  at  other  times, 
introduce  his  story  by  stating  that  the  tribes  had 
persistently  "cried  unto  God." 

III.  The  Mishnah  (Nazir,  i.  2)  already  distin- 
guishes between  a  perpetual  Nazarite  and  a  Samson- 
Nazarite.  And  in  fact,  the  Nazariteship  of  Samson 
is  unique,  has  never  repeated  itself,  and  never  can 
repeat  itself;  for  it  is  conditioned  by  the  history  of 
his  age.  Samuel  also  is  consecrated  "by  his  mother's 
'ow  that  he  shall  belong  to  God,  and  that  no  razor 
shall  come  upon  his  head;  but  there  is  nothing  to 
show  that  the  mother  observed  the  Nazaritic  rules 
in  her  own  person,  nor  is  anything  said  about  anv 
virtue  in  long  hair  in  connection  with  Samuel. 
Hannah  was  wholly  self-moved  in  the  making  of 
her  vow.  The  case  of  John  the  Baptist  likewise 
stancU  entirely  by  itself.  Here,  the  birth  of  the 
child  is  indeed  announced  by  an  angel,  but  his 
character  as  a  Nazarite  is  expressed  in  language 
altogether  peculiar  :  "  He  shall  be  great  in  the  sight 


speaking,  a  vow  to  be  like  Samson,  is  impossible 
For  Samson's  vow  began  not  with  himself,  bul 
with  his  mother.  According  to  the  law  in  the  6th 
chapter  of  Numbers,  an  Israelite  could  take  a  vow 
upon  himself  for  a  longer  or,  like  the  four  friends 
of  James  (Acts  xxi.  23),  for  a  shorter  period. 
When  the  time  was  expired,  he  shaved  himself, 
and  brought  an  ottering.  But  no  one  could  vow  tc 
be  like  Samson.  It  was  indeed  within  the  power 
of  a  mother  to  promise  to  bring  up  her  child  like 
Samson,  but  even  then  she  had  no  right  to  expect 
the  same  results  as  in  the  case  of  Samson.  It  is 
precisely  the  impotence  of  human  subjectivity  that 
is  demonstrated  by  Samson's  history.  It  cannot 
be  the  wish  of  all  mothers  to  have  Samson-children, 
when  they  suffer  the  hair  of  their  offspring  to  grow. 
The  angel's  announcement,  through  which  the 
spirit  in  the  law  begins  to  operate  even  in  the 
maternal  womb,  is  the  original  source  of  strength. 
The  Spirit  of  God  operates  on  mother  and  son, 
through  the  Nazariteship  as  its  organ.  The  power 
of  the  Nazir,  the  holy  influence  of  the  law,  opens 
the  man  himself;  the  outflow  of  divine  consecra- 
tion into  the  life  of  the  consecrated  cannot  take 
place  without  the  Spirit  of  God.  The  theological 
doctrine  of  the  preparatory  history  of  Samson,  is 
just  this  :  that  while  the  law  in  its'  immutable  ob- 
jectivity is  placed  over  against  the  subjective  forces 
of  prophecy  and  heroic  inspiration,  yet  it  can  never 
of  itself,  but  only  by  virtue  of  the"  Spirit  of  God 
pervading  and  quickening  it,  become  the  organ  of 
deliverance. 


ot  the  Lord,  and  shall  drink  neither  wine  nor  strong 
drink."  John  will  be  great  before  God,  and  because 
of  that  greatness  will  drink  no  wine.  Nothing  is 
said  about  long  hair,  and  the  origin  of  John's  vow 
is  placed,  not  in  the  act  of  another,  but  in  the 
strength  with  which  God  had  endowed  himself. 
The  Mishnah  puts  it  as  a  possible  case  that  a  person 
should  vow  to  be  a  Nazarite  like  Samson  ;  that  is, 
the  vow  is  hypothetically  so  limited  that,  while  it 
requires  him  who  makes  it  to  wear  his  hair  long, 
je  is  not  required  to  bring  sacrifices  for  defilement. 
Such  a  vow  was  named  after  Samson,  because  a 
Dart  of  his  life  was  imitated  by  it.     But  properly 


The  Nazaritic  institute  is  the  image  of  the  gen- 
eral priesthood,  of  the  fact  that  outside  of  the  tribe 
of  Levi,  it  is  possible  for  man  to  belong  whollv  to 
God.  The  visible  acts  which  it  prescribes,  repre- 
sent, as  in  a  figure,  the  purity  and  sinlessness  of  the 
heart  consecrated  to  God.  In  the  case  of  Samson, 
this  Nazariteship  begins  from  his  mother's  womb. 
Were  it  in  the  power  of  a  sou  born  of  human  par- 
ents, to  be  sinless  through  the  law,  Samson  the 
Nazarite  ought  to  have  been  sinless.  But  only 
Christ  is  the  true  Nazarite  in  spirit,  whose  life  re- 
alizes the  purity  of  the  idea,  and  whose  free  love, 
rooted  in  God,  continues  among  men  from  the 
womb  until  death.  Jacob,  the  dying  patriarch,  an- 
nounced a  blessing  "  on  the  head  of  Joseph  and  on 
the  crown  of  the  head  of  the  Nazir  of  his  brethren  " 
(Gen.  xlix.  26) ;  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt 
that  the  primitive  Christian  consciousness  inter- 
preted the  expression  "Nazir  of  his  brethren  "  not 
of  Joseph,  but  found  in  the  "  and  "  a  link  connectin» 
the  blessing  of  Joseph  with  the  person  of  Him  who 
was  a  Nazir  of  the  brethren  of  Joseph.  It  saw  in  the 
passage  a  prophecy  of  the  Messiah,  who  though  not 
descended  from  Levi,  was  yet  the  true  holy  and 
consecrated  high-priest.  Hence,  the  opinion  that 
in  the  language  of  the  evangelist  Matthew  (ii.  23), 
"  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  the 
prophets,  He  shall  be  called  a  Nafapatos,"  reference 
is  made  to  the  VHK  "VTJ,  the  "  Nazir  of  his  breth- 
ren," is  not  to  be  hastily  set  aside.  Remarkable, 
at  all  events,  is  it  that  the  ancient  Jewish  interpre- 
tation, when  Jacob  after  the  blessing  on  Dan  (Gen. 
xlix.  17)  adds  the  words:  "I  wait  for  thy  salva- 
tion, Jehovah!"  conceives  him  to  glance  from  the 
nearer  but  transient  deliverance  by  Samson,  to  the 
more  distant  but  eternal  redemption  of  Messiah 
(Beresc.h.  Rabba,  p.  86  c ;  cf.  the  1'argums  on  the 
passage) ;  and  that,  as  already  mentioned,  the 
mother  of  Samson,  in  1  Chron.  iv.  3,  is  named 
Hazelelponi  or  Zelelponi,  i.  e.,  "  the  shadow  falls 
on  me,"  which  may  be  compared  with  the  words  o' 


CHAPTER  Xin.   2-7. 


187 


3ie  angel  to  the  mother  of  Jesus  :  "  the  power  of  the 
Highest  shall  overshadow  thee." 

Ver.  5.  And  let  no  razor  come  upon  his  head. 
Here,  and  in  the  history  of  Samuel,  the  razor  is 

called  nTID,  whereas  in  Num.  ti.  4  ^5F1  is  used. 
Both  terms  come  from  the  same  stem   m^J,  mi- 

TT  ' 

dare,  to  uncover,  as  it  were  novare,  to  renew,  whence 
also  novacula,  sharp  knife,  razor.  There  appears  to 
be  less  ground  for  comparison  with  the  Greek  ,ua/5- 
oov,  Latin  marra,  the  signification  "  spade"  being 
too  far  removed.  On  the  other  hand,  a  certain  re- 
lationship of  '"'"J3?  with  the  Greek  £vpov,  Sanskrit 
khsrhura,  shears,  may  not  be  altogether  denied. 

He  shall  begin.  For  the  Philistines  oppressed 
Israel  forty  years,  and  Samson  judged  his  people 
only  twenty.  Samson  began  to  restore  victory  to 
Israel,  he  did  not  make  it  full  and  final.  The 
angel  of  God  who  calls  the  hero  out  of  the  womb 
of  his  mother,  knows  that  he  will  not  finish  that 
for  which  God  nevertheless  gave  him  strength. 
He  knows  it,  and  therefore  does  not  speak  as  he 
did  to  Gideon  :  "  Thou  shalt  deliver  Israel  "  (ch. 
vi.  14). 

Vers.  6,  7.  And  the  woman  came  and  told 
her  husband.  Before  telling  him  what  the  angel 
had  said,  she  excuses  herself  for  having  obtained 
no  particular  information  about  the  bearer  of  the 
announcement.  She  should  have  asked  him  whence 
he  was,  but  dared  not ;  for  he  was  a  "  man  of 
God,"  with  the  look  of  an  "  angel  of  God."  The 
angel  appeared  in  human  form ;  but  there  was  an 
imposing  splendor  about  him,  which  terrified  the 
woman.  Such,  probably,  had  also  been  the  case 
in  Gideon's  experience.  In  her  narrative  she  sup- 
plies what  we  do  not  find  in  ver.  5,  that  the  child's 
character,  as  a  Nazir  of  God,  is  to  last  from  the 
womb  until  "  the  day  of  his  death." 

HOMILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

The  grace  of  God  shows  itself  constantly  more 
wondrously.  It  was  to  be  made  ever  clearer  in 
Israel  that  all  salvation  comes  from  God,  and  that 
without  God  there  is  no  peace.  With  God  all 
things  are  possible.  He  can  raise  up  children  for 
himself  out  of  stones.  His  works  are  independent 
of  human  presuppositions  and  conditions.  He  has 
no  need  of  antecedent  historical  conditions  in  order 
to  raise  up  men.  When  in  times  of  impenitence 
even  vessels  are  wanting,  He  creates  the  vessels  He 
needs. 

How  differently  God  proceeds  in  the  election  of 
grace  from  the  methods  human  thought  would 
conceive,  is  shown  by  the  history  of  all  previous 
Judges.  The  deliverer  arises  there  where  the  nat- 
ural understanding  would  never  have  looked  for 
him.  But  Samson  God  raises  up  in  a  manner  in 
which  no  man  ever  conjectured  the  growth  of  a 
hero  to  take  place.  The  other  Judges  He  selected 
as  men  :  Samson  He  brought  up  to  be  a  hero. 

The  earlier  Judges  were  to  a  certain  extent  pre- 
pared for  their  work  even  before  their  election. 
Ehud  had  the  abilities  of  a  Benjaminite,  Deborah 
was  a  prophetess,  Gideon  a  strong  man,  Jephthah 
i  successful  military  leader.     When  the  Spirit  of 


God  came  upon  them,  they  became  Deliverers  and 
Judges.  In  Samson,  God  made  it  known  that  his 
grace  is  able  to  save  Israel  even  when  such  persons 
are  not  to  be  found.  Before  birth,  He  consecrate; 
the  child,  through  his  Spirit,  to  be  a  Nazarite 
Hence  grows  a  hero. 

Earlier  Judges  were  able,  like  Ehud,  to  perform 
single-handed  exploits  ;  but  they  achieved  deliver- 
ance only  in  connection  with  the  people.  They 
were  all  military  leaders  of  Israel,  and  had  to 
stand  at  the  head  of  pious  hosts.  In  Samson  it  is 
seen  that  this  also  is  not  indispensable.  Only  in- 
dividuals among  the  people  were  penitent ;  the 
tribes,  as  such,  were  unbelieving.  Therefore  the 
Spirit  raised  up  a  single  man  to  be  Judge :  he 
alone,  without  army  and  without  people,  fought 
and  delivered. 

For  this  reason,  the  ancient,  deeply  thinking 
church  regarded  Samson  especially  as  a  type  of 
the  history  of  Christ.  His  birth  was  similar  to 
that  of  Jesus.  Like  the  eternal  Word  who  became 
flesh,  he  was  typically  born  and  consecrated  of  the 
Spirit.  In  Christ,  also,  it  is  his  sinlessness  that 
presupposes  his  office  as  Saviour.  The  birth  of 
Christ  determines  his  resurrection.  He  must  be 
born  from  heaven  in  order  to  return  to  heaven. 
No  one  can  ascend  into  heaven  but  He  who  came 
down  from  heaven. 

There  was  also  no  penitence  in  Israel  when 
Christ  was  born.  A  few  sought  the  promised 
Messiah  in  the  prophets.  Christ  did  not  come  to 
put  himself  at  the  head  of  a  host  of  believers  ;  but 
alone,  as  He  was,  so  He  stood  among  the  people. 
He  performs  his  entire  work  alone.  He  needs  no 
legions  of  angels.  His  work  is  unique ;  and  He, 
the  worker,  is  a  solitary  hero. 

Every  believing  heart  treads  in  the  footsteps  of 
Christ.  Fellowship  is  good  in  Christian  work,  but 
not  essential.  A  Christian  can  live  alone,  if  he 
be  with  Christ. 

Starke  :  God  eares  for  his  people  when  they 
are  in  misery,  and  often  thinks  of  their  redemption 
before  they  think  of  it  themselves.  —  The  same  ■ 
God  connects  his  grace  and  gifts  with  mean  things, 
in  order  to  make  men  know  that  everything  is  to 
be  ascribed  to  the  grace  of  God,  and  not  to  the 
merits  of  men. 

[Bp.  Hall  :  If  Manoah's  wife  had  not  beeD 
barren,  the  angel  had  not  been  sent  to  her.  Afflic- 
tions have  this  advantage,  that  thev  occasion  God 
to  show  that  mercy  to  us,  whereof  the  prosperous 
are  incapable.  It  would  not  beseem  a  mother  U> 
be  so  indulgent  to  a  healthful  child  as  to  a  sick. — 
The  same  :  Nature  pleads  for  liberty,  religion  for 
restraint.  Not  that  there  is  more  uncleanness  in 
the  grape  than  in  the  fountain,  but  that  wine  finds 
more  uncleanness  in  us  than  water,  and  that  the 
high  feed  is  not  so  fit  for  devotion  as  abstinence.  — 
Wordsworth  :  Samson  is  a  type  of  Christ:  and 
in  all  those  things  where  Samson  fails,  there 
Christ  excels.  Samson  began  to  deliver  Israel 
but  did  not  effect  their  deliverance  (see  ch.  xiii.  1  , 
xv.  20).  He  declined  from  his  good  beginnings; 
and  fell  away  first  into  sin,  and  then  into  the 
hands  of  the  enemy.  But  Christ  not  only  begar 
to  deliver  Israel,  but  was  able  to  say  on  the  cross 
"  It  is  Jinished."  —  Tb.] 


188  THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


Manoah,  believing,  yet  desirous  of  confirmation,  prays  that  the  "Man  of  God"  may 

return,  and  is  heard. 

Chapter  XIII.  8-23. 

8  Then  [And]  Manoah  entreated  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  and  said,  0  my  Lord 
[Pray,  Lord  —  c£  ch.  vi.  16],  let  the  man  of  God  which  thou  didst  send  come  again 

9  unto  us,  aud  teach  us  what  we  shall  do  unto  the  child  that  shall  be  born.1  And 
God  hearkened  to  the  voice  of  Manoah  ;  and  the  angel  of  God  came  again  unto 
the  woman  as  she  sat  in  the  field  :  but  Manoah  her  husband  was  not  with  her. 

10  And  the  woman  made  haste,  and  ran,  and  shewed  [informed]  her  husband,  and  said 
unto  him,  Behold,  the  man  hath  appeared  unto  me,  that  came  unto  me  the  other 

11  day.  And  Manoah  arose,  and  went  after  his  wife,  and  came  to  the  man,  and  said 
unto   him,   Art  thou  the  man  that  spakest  unto  the  woman?     And  he  said,  I  am. 

12  And  Manoah  said,  Now  let  [When  now]  thy  words  come  to  pass.  [,]     How  [how] 

13  shall  we  order  the  child,  and  how  shall  we  do  unto  him?2  And  the  angel  of  the 
Lord  [Jehovah]  said  unto  .Manoah.  Of  all  that  I  said  unto  the  woman,  let  her  be- 

14  ware.  She  may  not  eat  of  any  thing  that  cometh  of  the  vine,  neither  let  her  drink 
wine  or  strong  drink,  nor  eat  any  unclean  thing :  all  that  I  commanded  her  let  her 

15  observe.  And  Manoah  said  unto  the  angel  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  I  pray  thee, 
let  us  detain  thee,  until  we  shall  have  made  [and  make]  ready  a  kid  for  [lit  before] 

16  thee.  And  the  angel  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  said  unto  Manoah,  Though  thou  de- 
tain me,  I  will  not  eat  of  thy  bread:  and  if  thou  wilt  offer  [prepare]  a  burnt- 
offering,  thou  must   [omit :  thou   must]  offer  it  unto  the  Lord   [Jehovah].     For 

17  Manoah  knew  not  that  he  was  an  angel  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah].  And  Manoah  said 
unto  the  angel  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  What  is  thy  name,8  that  when  thy  sayings 

18  come  [word  comes]  to  pass,  we  may  do  thee  honour  ?  And  the  angel  of  the  Lord 
[Jehovah]  said   unto    him.   Why   askest   thou  thus  [omit :  thus]   after  my   name, 

19  seeing  [and]  it  is  secret  \_Peli,  Wonderful]  ?  So  [Aud]  Manoah  took  a  [the]  kid, 
with  a  [and  the]  meat-offering,  and  offered  it  upon  a  [the]  rock  unto  the  Lord 
[Jehovah]  ;  and   the   angel   did  wondrously    [and    he    caused  a  wonder   to    take 

20  place],  and  Manoah  and  his  wife  looked  on.  For  it  came  to  pass,  when  the  flame 
went  up  toward  heaven  from  off  the  altar,  that  the  angel  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah] 
ascended  in  the  flame  of  the  altar,  and  Manoah  and  his  wife  looked  on  it  [omit:  it], 

21  and  fell  on  their  faces  to  the  ground.  But  [And]  the  angel  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah] 
did  no  more  appear  to  Manoah  and  to  his  wife.     Then  Manoah  knew  that  he  was 

22  an  angel  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah].     And  Manoah  said  unto  his  wife,  We  shall  surely 

23  die,  because  we  have  seen  God  [Elohim].  But  his  wife  said  unto  him,  If  the  Lord 
[Jehovah]  were  pleased  to  kill  us,  he  would  not  have  received  a  burnt-offering  and 
a  meat-offering  at  our  hands,  neither  would  he  have  shewed  us  all  these  things,  nor 
would  as  at  this  time  have  told  us  such  things  as  these. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 
[1  Ver.  8.  —  *7  v^TT.      Thi3  form  may  be  the  imperfect  of  pual,  with   the  article  used  as  a  relative  ;  but  It  is  prob- 
ibly  more  correct,  with  Keil  (after  Ewald,  169  <1 ),  to    regard  it  as  the  pual  participle,  the  preformative  72  being  failerj 

away.     Even  then,  however,  the  more  regular  mode  of  writing  would  be   "T-  *n,  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  12-  —  Dr.  Cagflel  renders  the  clause  more  literally  :  "  What  will  be  the  manner  of  the  boy,  and  his  doing7 '; 
But  the  rendering  of  the  E.  V.  correctly  interprets  the  lauguage  of  the  original,  and  agrees  with  our  author's  exposi- 
tion Whatever  obscurity  there  may  appear  to  be  in  ver.  12,  is  removed  by  ver.  8  ;  for  it  is  clear  that  the  petition  pre- 
ferred  in  ver.  12  can  be  no  other  than  that  made  in  ver.  8.  "J373H  tT  -t*'^2  is  the  statute  or  precept  (cf.  the  monastia 
term  "rule")  to  be  obierved  with  regard  to  the  boy — the  right  treatment  of  him  by  his  parents;  and,  similarly, 
JintTV^  is  that  which  they  are  to  do  to  him.  The  genitives  are  genitives  of  the  object,  cf.  Ues  Gram.  114,  2 ;  121, 
i.  — fa'.]" 

[8  Ver.  17.  —  "  TJ^2t£'  ^12  ;  properly  quit  nomin  tuunl.  equivaUnt  to  quis  nominarr  ^  asks  after  the  person,  HQ 
tfter  the  nature,  the  quality,  see  Ewald,  325  a."  (Keil).  —  Tr.1 


CHAPTER   XIII.    8-23. 


181, 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  8  ff.  And  Manoah  entreated  Jehovah. 
The  narrative  affords  a  pleasing  view  of  the  child- 
like piety  of  an  Israelitish  husband  and  wife  under 
the  old  covenant. 

The  adventure  with  the  angel  takes  upon  the 
whole  the  same  course  as  the  similar  incident  in 
the  life  of  Gideon  (cf.  on  ch.  vi).  The  angel  here 
comes  and  goes  as  there,  yields  to  entreaties  to 
tarry,  receives  an  offering,  disappears  in  the  flame. 
But  the  present  passage  discloses  also  new  and 
beautiful  features,  growing  out  of  the  mutual  rela- 
tions of  Manoah  and  his  wife.  The  peculiar  char- 
acteristics of  both  husband  and  wife  are  most  deli- 
cately drawn.  Manoah  is  a  pious  man,  he  knows 
how  to  seek  God  in  prayer,  and  is  not  unbelieving ; 
but  the  statements  of  his  wife  do  not  appear  to 
him  to  be  sure  enough,  he  would  gladly  have  them 
confirmed.  And  for  the  instruction  and  strength- 
ening of  Israel,  that  faith  may  be  full  and  strong, 
not  being  compelled  to  content  itself  with  the 
testimony  of  one  woman  only  to  the  wonderful 
event,  —  God,  having  respect  to  the  unawakened 
condition  of  the  people,  allows  himself  to  be  en- 
treated.1 But  although  Manoah  sees  in  the  second 
appearance  of  the  angel  the  fulfillment  of  his 
prayer,  he  still  recognizes  in  him  nothing  but  a 

man  (tf'S).  And  truly,  nothing  is  more  difficult 
for  man,  even  though  he  prays,  than  to  receive  the 
fulfillment  of  prayer  !  The  believing  obedience  of 
Manoah  to  the  commands  touching  his  wife's  con- 
duct with  reference  to  the  promised  child,  although 
he  conceives  them  to  be  delivered  by  no  other  than 
a  man,  indicates  that  the  coming  and  preaching  of 
such  a  man,  here  spoken  of  as  a  "man  of  God," 
was  nothing  unusual.  There  had  probably  been  a 
lack  only  of  such  obedience  as  Manoah  here  shows 
him.  What  is  more  surprising,  is.  that  even  when 
the  angel  declines  to  eat  of  his  bread,  Manoah  yet 
does  not  perceive  that  his  visitor  is  not  a  man. 
He  had  intended,  according  to  the  manner  of  an- 
cient hospitality,  as  known  also  to  Homer,  first  to 
entertain  his  guest,  and  then  to  inquire  after  his 
home  and  name.  Such  inquiries  have  interest, 
and  afford  guarantees,  only  in  the  case  of  a  man. 
But  even  the  answer  concerning  the  "wonderful  " 
name,  does  not  yet  excite  his  attention.  It  is  only 
after  the  angel's  disappearance  in  the  flame  that 
he  perceives,  —  what,  however,  none  but  a  believ- 
ing heart  could  perceive,  —  that  he  who  had  just 
departed  was  not  a  man.  The  wife  shows  herself 
more  receptive  and  sensitive  to  the  presence  of  a 
divine  being.  To  her,  the  stranger's  appearance, 
Jven  at  his  first  visit,  seemed  like  that  of  an  angel. 
.\t  his  second  visit  also,  she  speaks  of  his  coining 
in  language  usually  applied  to  angels, — -"  Behold, 

he  hath  appeared  unto  me  (fS"13,  ver.  10).  She 
had  needed  no  proof  or  explanation.  She  asks  no 
questions,  but  knows  what  he  has  said  to  her 
heart ;  anj  hence,  she  also  is  in  no  dread  when 
now  it  becomes  manifest  that  it  was  indeed  an 
angel  of  God.  Her  husband  is  apprehensive  of 
death ;  she  is  of  good  courage,  and  infers  the  con- 
trary. She  had  long  since  foreboded  the  truth, 
and  belongs  to  the  number  of  those  women  of 
sacred  history  whose  sensitive  hearts  enabled  them 
to  feel  and  see  divine  secrets,  and  whose  appear- 
ince  is  the  more  attractive,  the  more  unbelieving 
»nd  unreceptive  the  times  are,  in  which,  as  here, 

1   "" ' TJIV*!,   as  in  Gen.  xxv.  21  ;   Ex.  viii.  25- 


angels  reveal  themselves  to  women  rather  than  to 
men.  For  although  it  is  Manoah  who  prays  that 
the  man  of  God  may  come  again,  he  appears  not 
to  him,  but  again  to  the  wife.  He  waits,  however, 
while  she,  intuitively  certain  that  though  feelings 
of  reverence  do  not  allow  her  to  entreat  him  tc 
tarry,  he  will  nevertheless  do  so,  hastens  to  call 
her  husband. 

Vers.  12,  13.  And  Manoah  said,  'When  now 
thy  words  come  to  pass,  what  wiL.  be  the  man- 
ner of  the  boy  and  his  doing  ?  It  is  peculiar 
that  notwithstanding  the  plain  words  told  him  by 
his  wife,  Manoah  cannot  rest  satisfied  with  them. 
Doubtless,  it  could  not  but  appear  singular  to  him, 
that  his  wife  tells  him  of  what  she  is  to  do,  although 
the  call  to  be  a  Nazir  pertains  to  the  son  whose 
birth  is  promised.  Of  such  directions,  the  Mosaic 
statute  contained  no  traces.  It  appeared  to  him 
as  if  the  report  of  his  wife  must  contain  a  misun- 
derstanding on  this  point.  He  therefore  asks  twice, 
what  is  to  be  done  with  the  child,  since  hitherto  he 
had  principally  heard  only  what  the  mother  is  to  do. 
Hence,  the  angel  answers  him  plainly  :  "  What  I 
commanded  the  mother,  that  do!" 

Nor  eat  any  unclean  thing.  It  had  already 
been  said  in  ver.  4,  "  Thou  shalt  drink  neither  wine 
nor  intoxicating  drink,  nor  eat  any  thing  unclean." 
The  older  expositors  identified  this  prohibition  as 
to  food  and  drink  with  that  imposed  on  Nazarites 
in  Num.  vi.  4.  But  this  is  not  altogether  accurate, 
as  appears  from  ver.  14  of  our  passage.  Express 
mention  is  here  made  of  all  that  Num.  vi.  4  forbade 
to  be  eaten,  namely,  everything  that  comes  from 
the  vine,  and  yet  it  is  added,  "  nor  eat  any  un- 
clean thing."  Num.  vi.  does  not  speak  at  all  of 
anything  "  unclean,"  as  forbidden  to  the  Nazarite, 
because  no  Israelite  was  allowed  to  eat  what  was 
unclean.  Here  the  angel  adds  this  injunction, 
first,  because  it  was  a  time  in  which  much  of  the 
law  and  customs  of  Israel  had  perhaps  fallen  into 
neglect;  and,  secondly,  in  order  to  serve  to  Ma- 
noah and  his  wife  as  an  explanation  of  all  that 
was  enjoined  upon  the  latter.  The  wife  was  to 
abstain  from  the  use  of  everything  that  can  render 
unclean,  because  a  holy  and  pure  consecration  was 
to  rest  on  him  whom  she  was  to  bring  forth. 

Vers.  17  ff.  Why  askest  thou  after  my  name, 
and  it  is  Peli  ?  Renewed  attention  must  con- 
stantly be  directed  to  the  nice  discrimination  with 
which  the  designations  Jehovah,  Elohim,  and  the 
Elohim,  are  used  in  the  narrative.  Whenever  the 
narrator  speaks,  he  always  writes  Jehovah.  Con- 
cerning Samson,  the  expression  (ver.  5)  is,  that  he 
will  be  a  Nazir  of  Elohim ;  because  there  Elohim  in- 
dicates the  general  divine  afflatus  by  which  he  is  to 
be  surrounded,  and  is  the  term  also  used  in  Num. 

vi.  7 :    "  For  the   consecration   of  his    God  (~>T2 

VH7S)  is  upon  his  head."  When  the  believing 
parents  first  speak,  they  speak,  as  in  Judg.  vi.  20 
(see  above),  of  the  man  or  angel  of  "  the  God," 
:.  e.,  the  God  of  Israel  (vers.  6,  8).  Especially, 
however,  do  they  characterize  themselves  in  vers. 
22  and  23.  Manoah  anticipates  death,  "for  we 
have  seen  Elohim,"  a  divine  being  in  general.  The 
wife,  impressed  by  the  appearance  and  announce- 
ment, says  :  "  If  Jehovah  were  pleased  to  kill  us, 
he  would  not  have  accepted  our  offerings."  When- 
ever full  Faith  returns  in  Israel,  the  full  name  of 
Israel's  God,  Jehovah,  returns  with  it. 

But  when  Manoah  asks  the  atgel  for  his  name, 
the  reply  is  not,  Jehovah,  but  ^  5B      The  Masors 


iyo 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


reads  V?,  Peli ;  later  authorities  (cf.  Keil  inloc.), 
yS    2,  Pilei.     In  either  case,  the  word  is  adjective, 

but  identical  in  meaning  with  ^!?--  In  Isa.  ix.  5 
(6),  it  is  said  :  "  Unto  us  a  child  is  born,  and  hi? 
name  is  S./B."  His  name  is  Wonder,  Wonder- 
worker. Isa.  xxix.  14,  which  passage  serves  lit- 
erally to  explain  our  present  passage,  Bays  :  "75  i 

^7yt'  I  will  continue  to  show  myself  doing  won- 
ders to  this  people,  doing  wonder  upon  wonder." 
The  epithet  of  wonder  points  to  the  power  of  him 
to  whom  it  is  applied.  He  who  is  a  wonder,  does 
wonders.  In  Isa.  ix.  5  (6)  the  child  is  named  Pele, 
not  as  a  passive  wonder,  but  as  active ;  all  its  epithets 
are  active  :  Pele,  Counsellor,  Mighty  God,  Father, 
Prince.  Hence,  here  the  angel  also  calls  himself 
Peli,  Wonder-worker.  For  what  he  does  appears 
extraordinary.  A  child  was  chosen  in  the  matrix, 
and  endued  with  the  power  of  doing  wonders.  God 
testifies  in  times  of  distress  that  He  saves  Israel  by 
wonders,  and  does  not  cease,  even  in  their  ruin,  to 
interest  himself  wonderfully  in  their  behalf.  Ordi- 
nary means  of  salvation  are  wanting.     God  ever 

again  manifests  himself  in  Israel  as  the  S75"ntE'J?, 
"the  wonder-worker,"  as  He  is  styled  Ex.  xv.  11. 
As  such  He  gives  his  name  in  ver.  18,  and  shows 
his  power  in  ver.  19,  when  He  reveals  himself  in  the 
wonderful  manner  of  his  vanishing  away :  for  the 

expression  N^BO^^'he  caused  a  wonder"),  in 

the  latter  verse,  refers  back  to  ^SyB,  Peli,  of  ver. 
18.  The  name  Manoah  had  not  understood;  but 
in  the  deed  he  recognized  the  God  of  wonders. 

The  key  to  the  whole  narrative  is  contained  in 
this  word.  It  sets  forth  that  Israel's  preservation 
and  deliverance  rest  not  in  itself,  but  in  the  grace 
of  Him  who  is  wonderful  and  does  wonders  beyond 
all  understanding,  not  merely  in  nature,  but  also  in 
human  life  and  history.  Those  explanations  are 
therefore  wholly  insufficient,  which  render  the  word 
by  "  secret "  or  "  ineffable."  From  the  old  Jewish 
point  of  view,  this  interpretation  is  intelligible;  for 
to  them  the  external  ineffableness  of  the  name  Je- 
hovah appeared  to  be  its  chief  characteristic.  Jacob, 
when  he  wrestled  with  the  angel,  asked  after  his 
name.  "  Why  askest  thou  ?  "  replied  the  angel,  and 
gave  it  not.  As  he  wrestled  in  the  night,  so  he 
gave  no  name.  Here  the  unseen  corresponds  with 
the  unnamed.  But  in  the  instance  of  Samson's 
parents,  the  angel  is  seen.  What  he  says  and  does 
is  manifest  and  visible.    It  is  stated  with  emphasis, 

that  both  "  saw  "  (C>S~')-  If  the  angel,  by  sav- 
ing, "  Why  askest  thou  after  my  name  ?  "  had  de- 
signed to  refuse  an  answer  to  Manoah's  question, 
he  would  have  contented  himself  with  these  words. 
But  he  gives  him  a  name,  and  that  name  teaches 


that  Manoah  is  to  attend  rather  to  the  message 
than  the  manner  of  him  who  brings  it.  If  from  the 
word  "  Peli  "  Manoah  was  to  learn  that  the  name 
for  which  he  asked  was  "  ineffable,"  he  would  on 
hearing  it  have  already  perceived  that  the  messen- 
ger was  no  man,  for  there  was  only  One  to  whose 
name  this  could  apply.  But  it  was  not  till  after- 
wards that  Manoah  made  this  discovery.  The 
angel,  however,  does  not  design,  in  this  manner  to 
reveal  himself.  As  in  the  case  of  Gideon,  so  here, 
the  deed  is  to  show  who  the  announcer  was.  There- 
fore, with  fresh  kindness,  he  gives  him  the  name  he 
bears.  Angels  on  earth  are  always  named  from 
their  mission  and  work.  The  Word  of  the  New 
Covenant,  likewise,  when  He  became  flesh,  was 
called  Christ  Jesus,  from  his  work.  The  angel  in 
saying  "  Peli,"  gave  one  of  the  names  of  God,  — 

that  name  to  which  his  work  here  testified  (^7-^ 

mtt'l?^;.    Manoah  received  it  as  the  name  of  a 

man,  as  later  a  man  occurs  named  Pelaiah  (i"TS  vB, 
Neh.  viii.  7). 


HOMILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

Starke  :  The  names  of  God  are  of  great  cir- 
cumference and  vast  importance,  and  enclose  many 
secrets.  Nomina  Dei  non  sunt  nominalia,  sed  realia. 
—  Lisco  :  ".My  name  is  wonderful,"  mysterious, 
whose  depths  of  meaning  can  only  be  guessed  at 
by  human  thought,  never  fully  comprehended. 

[Bush  :  The  petition  of  Manoah  reminds  us 
also  that  the  care  of  children  is  a  great  concern, 
and  that  those  who  have  the  parental  relation  in 
prospect  can  make  no  more  suitable  prayer  at  the 
throne  of  grace  than  that  of  the  pious  Danite  on  this 
occasion.  Who  upon  the  eve  of  becoming  parents 
have  not  need  to  say,  as  said  Manoah,  "  Teach  us 
what  we  shall  do  to  the  child  that  shall  be  born."  — 
Bp.  Hall:  He  that  before  sent  his  angel  unasked, 
will  much  more  send  him  again  upon  entreaty. — 
The  same  :  We  can  never  feast  the  angels  better, 
than  with  our  hearty  sacrifices  to  God.  —  Bosh  (on 
ver.  23) :  This  was  a  just  mode  of  arguing;  for 
such  mercies  were  both  evidences  and  pledges  of 
God's  love  ;  and  therefore  were  rather  to  be  con- 
sidered as  earnests  of  future  blessings,  than  as  har- 
bingers of  ill.  The  woman  in  this  showed  herself 
not  only  the  strongest  believer,  but  the  wisest 
reasoner.  The  incidents  related  may  teach  us, 
( 1 )  That  in  times  of  dark  and  discouraging  provi- 
dences or  sore  temptations  we  should  remember  the 
past  experience  of  God's  goodness  as  a  ground  of 
present  support.  "  Account  the  long  suffering  of 
God  to  be  salvation."  He  that  hath  so  kindly 
helped  us  and  dealt  with  us  hitherto,  means  not  to 
destroy  us  at  last.  (2)  That  the  sinner  oppressed 
with  a  sense  of  his  deserts  has  no  reason  to  despair. 
Let  him  remember  what  Christ  has  done  for  him  by 
his  bloody  sacrifice,  and  read  in  it  a  sure  pr  »of,  that 
he  does  rot  design  his  death.  —  Tk.] 


CHAPTER    XIII.    24,  25. 


191 


The  birth  and  growth  of  Samson. 
Chapter  XIII.  24,  25. 

24  And  the  woman  bare  a  son,  and  called  his  name  Samson  [Shimshon].     And  the 

25  child  [boy]  grew,  and  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  blessed  him.  And  the  Spirit  of  the 
Lord  [Jehovah]  began  to  move  him  at  times  [omit :  at  times]  in  the  camp  of  Dan, 
between  Zorah  and  Eshtaol. 


EXEGETICAL   AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  24.  And  called  his  name  Shimshon.  The 
Septuagint  has  Sa^cei/,  Samson ;  Josephus  also,  j 
(Antiq.  v.  S,  4).     This  pronunciation  refers  to  the 

ancient  derivation  of  the  name  from  £,Xj?E!:\  the 

sun,  just  as  "tt-'Pt?1  (Shimshai,  Ezra  iv.  8)  is  pro-i 
nounced  Samsai  (Samurai;  according  to  the  Vat.  i 
Cud.  2afi<J/d),  and  as  we  hear  in  later  times  of 
Sampsaeans,  a  sun-sect.1  The  Masora  seems  to  i 
have  pointed  Shimshon  after  the  analogy  of  Shim- 
eon  (Simeon),  and  to  have  had  the  word  370JF, 
to  hear,  in  view.  The  derivation  from  shemesh, 
the  sun,  is,  however,  of  long  standing  among  the 
Jewish  expositors  also,  and  offers  the  best  grounds 
for  acceptance.  Other  explanations,  "mighty," 
"bold,"  "desolator,"  proposed  by  various  expos- 
itors, from  Serarius  to  Keil,  appear  to  be  without 
any  historical  motive.  The  name  may  be  brought 
into  connection  with  the  announcement  to  the 
parents,  that  their  son  would  "  begin  to  deliver 
Israel."  To  Hebrew  conceptions,  the  rising  of 
the  sun  is  an  act  of  victory.  In  this  spirit  Deb- 
orah sings  :    "  So  fall   all  thy  foes,   0   God ;  but 

irrB032  a?»©n  HNS?  vnqK  those  who 

love  thee  are  as  the  rising  of  the  sun  in  his 
strength"  (geburatho,  as  Samson  was  a  gibbor). 
Tin-  Jr\vi-h  expu.-itiirs  (cf.  .Inlhiit,  JmJic.  n.  iV.i.i 
said,  that  "  Samson  was  named  after  the  name  of 
God.  who  is  called  Sun  and  Shield  of  Israel  "  (Ps. 
lxxxiv.  12).  The  symbol  of  servitude  is  night, 
and  accordingly  the  tyranny  of  Egypt  is  so  called  ; 
but  the  beginning  of  freedom  is  as  the  dawn  of 
day  or  the  rising  of  the  sun.  The  interpretation 
of  our  hero's  name  as  Itrxvpit,  mighty,  by  Jose- 
phus, is  only  a  translation  of  gibbor,  for  the  sun 
also  is  called  a  hero  (Ps.  xix.  5,  6).  It  is  an  alle- 
gorical, not  etymological  interpretation,  and  gives 
no  warrant  for  charging  Josephus  with  philolog- 
ical error,  as  Gesenius  does  (  Gesch.  tier  hebr.  Spr. 
]>.  82).  That  some  writers  find  a  sun-god  in  this 
interpretation,  is  no  reason  for  giving  it  up;'2  espe- 
ciallv  when  this  is  done,  in  a  manner  as  bold  as  it 
confused,  as  by  Xork  [Bibl.  Myth.,  ii.  405),  who 
goes  so  far  as  to  compare  a  father  of  Adonis, 
"Manes"  (?'.'),  with  Manoah,  and  drags  in  the 
"  Almanack  "  besides.  The  Mosaic  law  forbade 
to  make  idol  images  of  wood  and  stone  as  repre- 
sentations of  nature ;  but  the  use  of  spiritual, 
figurative  images  drawn  from  sun  and  moon,  is 
constantly  characteristic  of  Scripture.  Notwith- 
standing all  nature-worship  as  connected  with  the 
fun,  and  its  censure  in  Scripture,  God  Himself  is 

1  On  other  similar  forms,  cf.  Selden,  De  Diis  Syrts  Synt. 
i.  225. 

■i  As  little  reason  as  there  is  to  doubt  the  etymology  of 
leliodorus,   because  the  author  of  the  *Ettuopica,  fiishop 


called  the  "  Sun  of  Righteousness. "  The  false 
syncretisms  to  which  more  recent  times  are  in- 
clined, have  their  origin  in  the  failure  to  separate 
rightly  the  fundamental  ideas  of  Biblical  and  of 
heathen  life. 

The  celebrated  Armenian  family  of  the  Amaduni 
considered  itself  to  be  of  Jewish  extraction.  It 
descends,  says  Moses  Chorenensis  (lib.  ii.  cap.  lvii 
ed.  de  Florival.  i.  283),  from  Samson,  the  son  of 
Manoah.  "  II  est  vrai,  qu'on  voit  encore  aujourd'- 
hui  la  meme  chose  dans  la  race  des  Amaduni,  car 
ce  sont  des  hommes  robustes,"  etc.  A  parallel  to 
this  is  afforded  by  the  Vilkina-legend,  which  places 
at  the  head  of  its  narratives  the  powerful  knight 
Samson,  dark  of  complexion,  like  an  Oriental, 
with  "  hair  and  beard  black  as  pitch  "  (cf.  the  edi- 
tion by  von  der  Hagen,  i.  4),  and  from  whom  the 
mighty  race  of  the  Amelungen  springs  (cf.  W. 
Grimm,  Die  Deutsche  HeUbnsaye ,  p.  264). 

Ver.  _'5-  And  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  began  to 
move  him.  The  fulfillment  had  taken  place.  The 
son  had  been  born.  He  grew  up  under  the  bless- 
ing of  God.  His  flourishing  strength,  his  great- 
ness of  spirit,  are  the  consequences  of  this  blessing. 
But  the  consecration  which  was  on  his  head,  and 
which  through  the  abstinence  of  his  mother  he 
had  already  received  in  the  earliest  moments  of 
corporal  formation  and  growth,  was  a  power  which 
imparted  to  him  not  only  physical  strength,  but 
also  spiritual  impulses.  No  angel  ever  comes  to 
Samson  ;  God  never  talks  with  him ;  no  appear- 
ances, like  those  to  his  parents,  occur  to  him. 
Whatever  he  carries  in  his  soul  and  in  his  mem- 
bers, he  has  received  from  the  consecration  that  is 
upon  his  head.  It  is  from  this  source  that  he 
derives  that  elevation  of  spirit  which  raises  him 
above  the  level  of  common  life,  and  urges  him  on 
to  deeds  of  heroism. 

In  the  camp  of  Dan,  between  Zorah  and  Esh- 
taol. Zorah  was  Samson's  native  place,  always 
appears  in  juxtaposition  with  Eshtaol  (Josh.  xv. 
33;  xix.  41),  and  was  inhabited  by  Danites  and 
men  of  Judah.  Its  site  is  recognized  in  the  Tell 
of  Sur'a,  from  whose  summit  Hobinson  had  a  fine 
and  extensive  view  (BiU.  Res.  iii.  153).  For  Esh- 
taol no  probable  conjecture  has  yet  been  offered. 
The  "Camp  of  Dan "  (cf.  ch.  xviii.  12)  was  a 
place  between  the  two  cities,  both  of  which  are 
1  located  by  the  Onomosticon  in  the  region  north  of 
Eleutheropolis.  Eusebius  in  mentioning  Eshtaol 
says,  ""T.vBcv  oiouhto  Sa/x^crdiv,"  thence  Samson  set 
out,  which  Jerome  corrected  into,  "  ubi  mortuus  est 
Samson,"  where  Samson  died.  The  "  Camp  ,)f 
Dan,"  if  it  were  not  a  regular  military  post,  must 
at  all  events  have  had  warlike  recollections  con- 

Ueliodore  of  Tricka,  calls  himself  a  "  descendant  of  Uelios," 
from  the  fact  that  he  belonged  to  Emesa,  tbe  city  f  a  cele 
brated  temple  of  the  sun  (lib.  x.  at  the  close) 


is-; 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


nected  with  its  name  and  hill-top  situation  (cf.  ch. 
i.  34).  It  was  there  that  the  passion  for  exploits 
against   the   Philistines   first   seized    on   Samson. 

The  expression,  n  i™l   ^nip],  •'  the  spirit  began," 

manifestly  answers  to  the  ;H*  SVT,  "  he  shall 
begin,"  of  ver.  5.  The  young  man  was  first  seized 
upon  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  'Q3??/.  The  opera- 
tion which  this  word  E3?Q  expresses  is  not  an 
organic  work  of  faith,  such  as  Gideon  or  Jephthah 
perform.  It  is  an  impulsive  inspiration  ;  the  sud- 
den ebullition  of  a  spiritual  force,  which,  as  in  the 
;ase  of  the  Seer  it  manifests  itself  in  words,  in  that 
of  Samson  breaks  forth  into  action.  But  yet  it  is 
no  demoniac  paroxysm,  nor  the  drunken  madness 


of  a  Bacchant  or  the  frenzy  of  a  rude  Berserker 
but  the  sober  movement  of  the  Spirit  of  God, 
which,  while  giving  heroic  power,  also  governed 
it.  How  little  mythical  the  history  is,  is  evinced 
by  the  fact  that,  according  to  the  narrator,  the 
place  is  still  known  where  the  young  man  first 
became  conscious  that  he  had  another  calling  than 
to  assist  his  father  at  home  in  the  field.  The 
Spirit  of  God  thrusts  him  out  into  public  activity. 
His  father's  house  becomes  too  narrow  for  him. 
His  public  career  begins.  What  that  career  is  to 
be,  is  yet  to  be  revealed  to  him.  But  he  is  driven 
out,  and  he  goes.  From  the  Camp  of  Dan  he 
issues  forth,  a  youthful  hero,  like  Parcival,  in  quest 
of  adventure.  With  what  result,  is  related  farther 
on. 


The  opening  step  of  Samson's  career :  his  unlawful  desire  to  marry  a  daughter  of 
the  Philistines  overruled  by  God  for  Israel's  good. 

Chapter    XIV.  1-4. 

1  And  Samson  went  down  to  Timnath  [Timnathah],  and  saw  a  woman  in  Tim- 

2  nath  [Timnathah]  of  the  daughters  of  the  Philistines.  And  he  came  up,  and  told 
his  father  and  his  mother,  and  said,  I  have  seen  a  woman  in  Timnath  [Timnathah] 

3  of  the  daughters  of  the  Philistines  :  now  therefore  get  her  for  me  to  wife.  Then 
[And]  his  father  and  his  mother  said  unto  him,  Is  there  never  a  woman  among  the 
daughters  of  thy  brethren,  or  among  all  my  people,  that  thou  goest  to  take  a  wife 
of  the  uncircumcised  Philistines  ?     And  Samson  said  unto  h,s  father,  Get  her  for 

4  me  ;  for  she  pleaseth  me  well  [is  pleasing  in  my  eyes].  But  [And]  his  father  and 
his  mother  knew  not  that  it  teas  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  that  [for]  he  sought  an 
occasion  against  [from]  the  Philistines :  for  at  that  time  the  Philistines  had  do- 
minion [were  lording  it]  over  Israel. 


EXEQETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  1.  And  Samson  went  down  to  Tinman. 
Timnah  or  Timnathah,  the  present  Tibneh,  sit- 
uated to  the  southwest  of  Zorah,  at  the  confluence 
o(  Wady  Sunn  with  Wady  Surar  (Ritter,  xvi.  116; 
[Gage's  Tran-1.  iii.  241  J),  on  the  border  of  the  tribe 
jf  Judah  (Josh.  xv.  10),  was  assigned  by  Joshua  to 
the  tribe  of  Dan  (Josh.  xix.  43),  but  had  fallen  into 
the  hands  of  the  Philistines. 

Ver.  2, 3.  Get  her  for  me  to  wife.  The  history 
of  Samson  abounds  with  instructive  notices  of  the 
social  life  of  the  times.  The  women  lead  a  free 
life,  not  shut  up,  as  they  are  in  the  East  of  the 
present  day.  The  stranger  can  see  the  beauty  of 
the  daughters  of  the  land.  But  Samson  cannot  yet 
dispense  with  the  permission  of  his  parents.    He  is 

yet  in  their  house,  unmarried,  a  ~fln2.  From  the 
choice  of  Samson,  and  his  mode  of  life,  there  comes 
to  view,  in  the  first  place,  the  prevalent,  though  un- 
lawful, admixture  of  Israelitish  and  heathen  fatni- 
iiis  and  customs.  But  the  barriers  raised  by  differ- 
ence of  nationality  are  nevertheless  manifest.  The 
parents  at  tiist  refuse  their  consent  to  Samson's 
choice ;  but  they  cannot  resist  his  prayer.     He  is 

1  [K >:i i  :  It  is  true  that  in  Ex   xxxiv.  16  and  Deut.  vii.  3  f.  }  to  marriages  with  daughters  of  the  Philistines.     For  tti« 
inly  marriages  with  Cauaanitish  woolen  are  expressly   for- 
bidden ;   but  the  ground  of  the  prohibition  extended  equally 


their  only  son,  —  and  such  a  son !  full  of  strength 
and  youthful  promise,  —  therefore  it  gives  them 
pain.1 

Ver.  4.  And  his  father  and  his  mother  knew 
not.  If  the  mother  kept  in  her  heart  the  saying 
that  her  son  would  begin  to  deliver  Israel,  his 
strength  and  gifts  doubtless  awakened  many  hopes 
within  her.  But  his  wish  to  marry  a  Philistine 
maiden,  seemed  to  destroy  every  expectation.  He 
who  when  in  his  mother's  womb  was  already  con- 
secrated to  be  a  Nazarite,  desires  to  enter  into  cov- 
enant with  those  who  have  not  even  the  consecra- 
tion of  circumcision,  —  and  that  against  the  law! 
He  who  was  endowed  to  he  a  deliverer  and  cham- 
pion of  Israel  against  the  national  enemies,  shall 
he  become  a  friend  of  the  tyrants,  a  member  of  one 
of  their  families  ?     For  the  parents  knew  not.  — 

That  this  was  of  Jehovah,  for  it  became  an 
occasion  of  assaying  the  Philistines ;  and  at 
that  time  the  Philistines  ruled  over  Israel. 
The  parents  could  not  but  be  painfully  affected, 
fur  they  knew  not  what  the  consequence  would  be 
But  although  ignorant  on  this  point,  they  never- 
theless yielded.  They  unconsciously  submit  to  'hi 
stronger  spirit  of  Samson;   and  thus  their  indul 


same  reason,  in  Josh.  xiii.  3,  the  Philistines  also  are  reck 
oned  am'-ng  the  Cauaanites.  —  Tr.] 


CHAPTER   XIV      1-4. 


193 


gence  united  with  the  unconscious  longing  of  their 
6on  to  bring  about  the  fulfillment  of  what  the  angel 
had  announced. 

The  career  of  Samson  is  an  historical  drama 
without  a  parallel.  Its  dark  background  is  the 
national  life  out  of  which  he  emerges,  Israel  is 
under  Philistine  oppression,  because  of  sin  and 
consequent  enervation.  It  is  not  without  resent- 
ment against  the  enemy,  but  it  lacks  spirit.  It 
prefers  slavish  peace  to  a  freedom  worth  making 
sacrifices  for.  It  hates  the  national  enemies,  but  it 
holds  illicit  intercourse  with  them.  Such  a  national 
life  in  itself  can  beget  no  heroes,  nor  use  them  when 
they  exist. 

The  influence  of  this  national  life  is  evident  in 
Samson  himself.  He  lias  uncqualed  spirit,  strength, 
and  courage;  but  he  is  alone.  The  young  man  finds 
no  sympathy,  at  which  to  kindle  himself.  There 
are  no  patriots  in  search  of  heroes.  There  is  no 
national  sorrow,  that  waits  longingly  for  deliver- 
ance and  a  deliverer,  and  in  consequence  thereof 
recognizes  him  when  he  appears.  On  the  contrary, 
luxury  and  sensuality  prevail,  eating  away  the 
heart  of  the  rising  generation ;  for  national  char- 
acter also  is  wanting,  by  which,  conscious  of  their 
power,  Israel's  youth  might  clearly  recognize  their 
proper  goal.  Samson  too  had  perished  in  sensu- 
ality, which  does  not  distinguish  between  friend 
and  foe ;  but  his  genius  has  a  seal  that  cannot  be 
broken.  The  consecration  on  his  head  preserves 
in  his  soul  an  impulse  that  cannot  miss  its  goal. 
The  law  of  this  consecration  is  freedom.  For  free- 
dom's sake,  it  lends  him  strength  and  spirit.  Han- 
nibal's father  made  him  when  but  a  boy  swear 
everlasting  war  against  the  Romans.  Samson,  as 
Nazarite  from  his  birth,  is  borne  onward,  less  con- 
sciously, but  even  more  surely,  to  a  hatred  with 
which  he  is  not  acquainted,  and  to  wrath  and  bat- 
tle for  the  freedom  of  Israel. 

Samson  is  without  an  army,  without  a  congenial 
popular  spirit,  without  sympathy  and  courage  on 
the  part  of  his  countrymen, — not  even  Gideon's 
three  hundred  are  with  him ;  he  has  no  teacher 
and  spiritual  leader;  he  is  alone,  and  moreover 
exposed  to  every  temptation  to  which  gigantic 
strength  and  corporal  beauty  give  rise;  but  in  his 
consecration  to  God  he  has  a  guidance  that  does 
not  lead  astray.  Hence,  that  by  which  others  are 
fettered  and  subjected,  becomes  for  him  the  means 
of  attaining  his  destiny.  The  paths  on  which  others 
go  to  destruction,  for  him  become  highways  of  vic- 
tory and  of  strength.  It  is  an  act  of  national  trea- 
Bon,  when  he  takes  a  Philistine  wife ;  and  yet  for 
him,  it  becomes  the  occasion  for  deeds  in  behalf  of 
national  freedom. 

There  is  no  historical  drama  in  which  the  no- 
bility and  invincible  destiny  of  a  great  personality, 
reveal  themselves  so  luminously  as  in  the  life  of 
Samson. 

It  is  well  known  that  in  the  history  and  fiction 
of  all  nations,  as  in  the  heroic  poems  of  all  ages, 
love  for  women  has  formed  a  chief  motive  for  con- 
flict and  adventure.  Even  the  circumstance  which 
throws  so  great  a  charm  over  the  lives  and  contests 
of  the  heroes  to  whom  it  appertains,  that  their  love 
breaks  through  the  confines  of  their  own  nation  or 
pam ,  and  attaches  itself  ;o  women  who  live  within 


the  circle  of  the  enemy,  is  constantly  recurring 
But  in  those  narratives,  as  also  in  the  Persian 
legend,  where  Rudabe,  the  mother  of  Rustem,  is  the 
daughter  of  her  Iranian  lover's  hereditary  foeman, 
and  as  in  Tasso's  Jerusalem  Delivered,  in  Borneo 
and  Juliet,  and  in  the  dramas  of  Schiller,  —  love 
is  the  central  point  and  principal  motive.  Politi- 
cal barriers,  national  hatreds,  ancient  passions,  all 
must  yield  to  love,  whether  it  ends  in  joy  or  trag' 
edy.  How  different  is  its  position  in  the  history 
of  Samson  !  The  antagonism  between  Israel  and 
the  Philistines  is  justified  and  commanded.  Truth 
cannot  intermix  itself  with  idolatry.  The  over- 
leaping by  sensuality  of  the  spiritual  barriers  be- 
tween the  two,  is  the  cause  of  Israel's  sunken  con- 
dition. That  love  through  which  Samson  desires 
the  maiden  of  Timnah,  can  be  no  jovful  goal. 
Hence,  the  relation  of  his  inborn  heroism  to  love 
shows  itself  to  be  very  different  from  that  which 
obtains  in  heathenism  and  romance.  There,  the 
exploits  of  heroism  become  the  occasions  of  love ; 
for  Samson,  romance  becomes  the  occasion  of  hero- 
ism. There,  love  overleaps  the  lines  that  separate 
nationalities  ;  in  Samson's  case,  it  becomes  the  oc- 
casion by  which  he  becomes  mindful  of  the  separa- 
tion. Elsewhere,  weakness,  sensuality,  enjoyment, 
become  the  snares  which  bind  the  inflamed  hero  ; 
but  for  Samson,  they  become  only  the  occasion  for 
rending  asunder  the  fetters,  and  for  understanding 
the  purpose  for  which  he  is  endowed  with  divine 
strength. 

And  at  that  time  the  Philistines  ruled  over 
Israel.  The  addition  of  this  remark  is  by  no 
means  superfluous.  It  serves  to  indicate  the  back- 
ground of  all  Samson's  deeds.  The  mere  fact  that 
the  Philistines  ruled,  demonstrated  Israel's  apos- 
tasy and  punishment ;  that  they  continued  to  rule, 
was  evidence  of  Israel's  powerlessness  and  ina- 
bility to  repent.  It  was  because  they  ruled,  and 
Israel  was  without  repentance,  that  Samson  ap- 
pears so  different  from  Gideon  and  Jephthah.  In 
the  midst  of  the  Philistine  supremacy,  he  enters  on 
his  single-handed  conflict  with  them.  Notwith- 
standing that  they  ruled  by  means  of  Israel's  own 
sin,  the  objective  power  of  the  divine  law  and  spirit 
evinces  itself  in  the  hero-nature  of  Samson,  almost 
against  his  own  will. 


HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

[Bush:  "I  wish,"  says  an  old  divine,  "  tha» 
Manoah  and  his  wife  could  speak  so  loud  that  all 
our  Israel  could  hear  them."  By  nothing  is  the 
heart  of  a  pious  parent  more  grieved  than  by  the 
prospect  of  the  unequal  yoking  of  his  children 
with  profane  or  irreligious  partners ;  for  he  knows 
that  nothing  is  so  likely  to  prove  injurious  to  their 
spiritual  interests,  and  subject  them  to  heartrend- 
ing trials.  —  Bp.  Hall  :  As  it  becomes  not  children 
to  be  forward  in  their  choice,  so  parents  may  not 
be  too  peremptory  in  their  denials.  It  is  not  safe 
for  children  to  overrun  parents  in  settling  their 
affections ;  nor  for  parents  (where  the  impediments 
are  not  very  material )  to  come  short  of  their  chil- 
dren, when  the  affections  are  once  settled  :  the  one 
is  disobedience;  the  other  may  be  tyranny.  — Tb.] 


i94 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


Samson  goes  down  to  Timnah,  with  his  parents,  to  speak  with  his  bride-elect.      On 
the  way,  he  meets  and  tears  a  young  lion. 

Chapter  XIV.    5-9. 

5  Then  went  Samson  [And  Samson  went]  down,  and  his  father  and  his  mother,  t* 
Timnath  [Timnathah],  and  [they]  came  to  the  vineyards  of  Timnath  [Timnathahj 

6  and  behold,  a  young  lion  roared  against  him  [came  to  meet  him,  roaring].  And 
the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  came  mightily  [suddenly]  upon  him,  and  he  rent 
him  as  he  would  have  rent  [as  one  rends]  a  kid,  and  he  had  nothing  in  his  hand 

7  but  [and]  he  told  not  his  father  or  his  mother  what  he  had  done.  And  he  went 
down,  and  talked  with  the  woman ;  and  she  pleased  Samson  well  [was  pleasing  in 

8  the  eyes  of  Samson].  And  after  a  time  he  returned  to  take  her,  and  he  turned 
aside  to  see  the  carcass  of  the  lion :  and  behold,  there  was  a  swarm  of  bees  and 

9  honey  in  the  carcass  of  the  lion.  And  he  took  thereof  in  his  hands,  and  went 
on  [,]  eating  [as  he  went],  and  came  to  his  father  and  mother,  and  he  gave  them, 
and  they  did  eat :  but  he  told  not  them  [them  not]  that  he  had  taken  the  honey 
out  of  the  carcass  of  the  lion. 


EXEQETICAL   AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  5.  And  Samson  went  down,  with  his 
father  and  mother,  to  Timnathah.  The  parents 
give  way ;  at  all  events,  they  now  first  go  down, 
with  Samson,  to  see  the  maiden,  and  ascertain 
more  about  her.  The  proper  object  of  the  journey 
appears  from  ver.  7,  where  we  are  told  that  Sam- 
son "  talked  with  the  woman,  and  she  pleased  him." 
Hitherto  he  had  only  seen  her  (ver.  1).  His  par- 
ents urge  him  to  "  speak  with  her,"  in  order  to 
convince  himself  of  her  character;1  and  he  de- 
termines to  do  so.  On  this  account,  the  statement 
of  ver.  3  is  repeated  in  ver.  7  :  "  she  pleased  him  " 
now,  after  speaking  with  her,  as  formerly  after 
seeing  her ;  he  therefore  persists  in  his  suit,  and 
appoints  the  time  of  his  marriage.  The  hope  of 
the  parents  that  the  woman,  by  her  want  of  agree- 
ableness  and  spirit,  would  discourage  their  son,  is 
not  realized.  No  such  want  seems  to  have  existed, 
so  far  as  he  was  concerned. 

And  a  young  lion  came  to  meet  him,  roaring. 
Samson  went  to  Timnathah  to  look  for  a  wife,  not 
to  engage  in  a  lion-hunt.  The  comparison  of  his 
lion-right  with  that  of  Hercules  in  Nemea,  is  alto- 
gether superficial  and  uncritical ;  and  the  idea  that 
his  victory  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  first  of  twelve 
exploits,2  has  no  foundation  either  in  his  spirit  or 
history.  The  Nemean  victory,  as  I  hope  yet  to 
show  elsewhere,  is  the  expression  of  a  mythical 
symbolism,  and  is  accordingly,  to  a  certain  extent, 
an  epos  complete  in  itself.  Samson's  conflict  with 
the  lion  is  an  incidental  occurrence.  It  was  neither 
the  object  of  his  expedition  originally,  nor  did  it 
come  to  be  its  central  point  of  interest  afterwards. 
The  chief  difference  between  the  two  stories  lies  in 
the  totally  dift'erent  vocations  of  the  heroes  :  Her- 
cules wrestles  with  beasts,  conquers  the  hostility 
which,  according  to  the  Hellenic  myth,  inheres  in 
Nature ;  Samson  is  a  conqueror  of  men,  a  national 
nero  who  triumphs  over  the  enemies  of  his  people 
and  their  faith,  a  champion  of  freedom,  whose 
urength  is  so  great  that  he  can  well  afford  to  ex- 

1  Of.  Abarbanel  in  Incum.  The  offense  of  such  mar- 
riages, the  later  Jews,  with  reference  to  Samson  and  Solo- 
mon, sought  to  avoid  by  assuming  that  the  heathen  had 
3*UA«d  their  women  to  be  converted  to  the  true  religion. 


pend  a  little  portion  of  it  in  a  passing  encounter 
with  a  lion.  Samson  is  not  elected  to  take  the 
field  against  lions  and  foxes,  —  that  would  never 
have  given  him  a  name  in  the  history  of  Israel ; 
but  his  strength  and  dexterity  are  great  enough  to 
enable  him  to  make  use  of  even  lions  and  foxes, 
dead  or  alive,  as  means  of  his  national  conflict. 
Among  his  exploits,  only  the  blows  are  reckoned, 
which  he  inflicted  on  the  Philistines,  —  not  the  oc- 
casional means  which  he  employed  in  their  deliv- 
ery. As  little  as  David's  royal  vocation  was  rooted 
in  the  battles  of  his  shepherd  days  with  lions  and 
bears,  so  little  was  Samson's  destiny  as  a  hero  the 
outgrowth  of  his  victory  over  the  lion  whom  he 
did  not  seek,  but  who  quite  unexpectedly  roared 
out  against  him.  He  had  left  his  parents  a  little 
space,  and  when  near  the  vine  hills  of  Timnathah 
had  entered  into  a  wilderness  skirting  the  road, 
when  the  monster  rushed  upon  him. 

Ver.  6.  And  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  came  upon 

him,  rrn  nb?Fn.  The  peculiar  force  of  nb^ 
is,  that  it  expresses  the  fortunateness  of  an  occur- 
rence, its  happening  just  at  the  right  time.  In  the 
very  moment  of  need,  the  "Spirit  of  Jehovah" 
came  upon  him.  In  five  passages  where  the  ex- 
pression "  Spirit  of  Jehovah"  occurs  (ch.  iii.  10; 
vi.  34;  xi.  29;  xiii.  25,  and  here),  the  Chaldee 
translation  renders  it  "  spirit  of  heroic  strength  " 
(geburah) ;  for  God  also  is  a  Gibbor,  a  Hero,  and 
the  translator  wishes  in  this  way  to  distinguish 
between  the  spirit  of  prophecy,  the  spirit  of  divine 
speech,  which  was  also  a  spirit  of  God  (cf.  e.  g.,  the 
'  Targum  on  Num.  xxiv.  2-xxvii.  11,  and  also  1 

Sam.  x.  6,  etc.,  HSU?  rffl~l),  and  the  spirit  of 
heroic  action.  But  the  original,  very  justly,  makes 
no  distinction  ;  for  in  the  view  of  divine  doctrine 
all  that  man  does  is  referred  to  the  Spirit-source. 
Nothing  succeeds  without  God.  Samson  needs 
that  moral  strength  which  does  not  fear  the  lion. 
The  might,  not  of  his  arms,  but  of  his  soul,  was 
of  the  first  importance.  For  courageous  undertak- 
ings, there  is  need  of  divine  inspirations.     Hence, 

Cf.  Danz,  Baplismus  Proselylorum,  §  26  ;  MeuBchen,  Nov. 
Test,  in  Talm.,  p.  263. 

2  This  idea  has  been  set  forthwith  special  plausibility  by 
Bertheau,  and  is  justly  and  ably  combated  by  Keil. 


CHAPTER  XIV.   5-9. 


195 


the  attack  of  Samson  on  the  lion  is  here  ascribed 
to  an  impulse  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  as  well  as 
Jephthah's  resolution  to  attack  Ammon  in  his 
own  country  (ch.  xi.  29).  And  it  is  to  be  further 
noted,  that  in  every  case  the  expression  is,  not  the 
Spirit  of  Elohim,  but  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  ;  for  it 
was  He  on  whom  Israel  was  to  believe,  and  from 
whom,  for  his  own  glory  and  the  salvation  of 
Israel,  proceeded  the  power  which  Samson  pos- 
sessed against  the  enemies  who  knew  not  Jeho- 
vah. 

And  he  rent  him.     It  was  a  terrible  lion  that 

came  to  meet  him  :  a  *^sS?i  a  term  especially  used 
when  the  rapacious  and  bloodthirsty  nature  of 
the  lion  is  to  be  indicated.     Bochart  explains  the 

compound  name  i~^,^!S  1*23  very  beautifully  by 

means  of  C^-TJ?  ,-12,  especially  here,  where  the 
fierceness  of  the  lion  is  opposed  to  the  weakness 
of  a  hoedus,  kid  of  the  goats.  VDW  is  equivalent 
to  o'x'C"',  to  rend  asunder.  As  the  lion  comes 
rushing  towards  him,  Samson  awaits  him,  seizes 
him,  and  rends  his  jaws  asunder.  And  this  he  did 
as  easily  as  if  it  were  a  kid  of  the  goats.  For  the 
remark,  "  as  one  rends  a  kid,"  does  not  imply  that 
it  was  customary  always  to  rend  kids  in  this  man- 
ner, but  simply  means  that  a  kid  could  not  have 
been  more  easily  overcome  than  this  powerful  lion 
was.  According  to  some  ancient  statements,  Her- 
cules choked  the  Nemean  lion  in  his  arms ;  and  it 
is  undoubtedly  with  reference  to  this  that  Josephus 
Bays  of  Samson  also,  that  he  strangled  (Syxe')  tne 
monster.  According  to  a  French  romance,  Iwain, 
the  romantic  hero  of  the  Round  Table,  derived 
his  epithet,  "  Knight  of  the  Lion,"  from  the  fact 
that  after  a  long  struggle  he  had  choked  a  lion  : 
"  il  prist  Lionian  parmi  la  gorge  as  poinz  ....  si 
l'estrangla."  Cf.  Holland,  Chretien  de  Troyes,  p. 
361. 

And  he  had  nothing  in  his  hand.  He  had 
gone  forth  to  look  for  a  wife,  not  expecting  a 
battle.  If,  however,  it  be  nevertheless  surprising 
that  a  young  man  like  Samson  carried  no  weapons, 
we  are  to  seek  for  the  reason  of  it  in  the  domina- 
tion of  the  Philistines.  Those  tyrants  suffered  no 
weapons  in  the  hands  of  the  conquered,  and  hin- 
dered and  prohibited  the  introduction  of  them  and 
the  traffic  in  them  (cf.  1  Sam.  xiii.  20).  The  sus- 
picion of  the  enemy  had  found  matter  enough  for 
its  exercise,  if  young  men  like  Samson  had  come 
armed  into  their  cities.  But  even  without  arms, 
the  heroic  strength  of  Samson  everywhere  evinces 
itself;  for  not  iron,  but  the  Spirit,  gives  victory. 
Pausanias  (vi.  5)  tells  of  Polydamas,  a  hero  of 
Scotussa  in  Elis,  who  lived  about  400  b.  c,  that 
he  overcame  a  great  and  strong  lion  on  Olympus, 
without  a  weapon  of  any  kind. 

And  he  told  not  his  father  or  his  mother 
what  he  had  done.  It  is  certainly  instructive  to 
institute  a  comparison  between  Samson  and  the 
numerous  lion-conquerors  of  history  and  tradition. 
For  it  reveals  Samson's  greatness  of  soul  in  a 
most  significant  way.  To  him,  the  victory  over 
the  lion  is  precisely  not  one  of  the  twelve  labors 
which  in  the  Heraclean  mythus  is  glorified  by  tra- 
dition and  art.  He  wears  no  lion's  skin  in  conse- 
quence of  it.  He  makes  so  little  ado  about  it,  that 
he  does  not  even  inform  his  parents  of  it,  probably 
in  order  not  to  startle  them  at  the  thought  of  the 
danger  to  which  he  has  been  exposed.  For,  at 
that  time,  he  could  ni  t  yet  have  thought  of  his 
■ubsequent  fanciful  conceit.     There  is  nothing  un- 


usual about  his  appearance  and  demeanor,  when 
he  again  overtakes  them.  He  exhibits  neither  ex- 
citement nor  uncommon  elation.  The  divine  spirit 
that  slumbered  in  him  has  just  been  active ;  but 
the  deed  he  performed  under  its  impulse  appeared 
to  him,  as  great  deeds  always  do  to  great  souls,  to 
have  nothing  of  a  surprising  character  about  it, 
but  to  be  perfectly  natural.  Others  are  impresses 
to  astonishment  by  what  to  such  persons  are  but 
natural  life  utterances.  What  we  call  geniality, 
what  in  Samson  appears  as  the  result  of  divine 
consecration,  cannot  exhibit  itself  more  beauti- 
fully. It  is  the  fullness  of  spirit  and  strength  in 
men,  out  of  which  exploit  and  heroism  flow  as 
streams  flow  from  their  sources.  To  this  very 
day,  it  is  only  small  spirits,  albeit  often  in  thick 
books,  who  watch  like  griffons  over  each  little 
thought  that  occurs  to  them,  fearing  to  lose  the 
mirror  in  which  they  see  themselves  reflected,  and 
the  lion-skin  with  which  proprietorship  invests 
them.  Of  Samson's  victory  nothing  had  ever  beea 
heard,  had  it  not  furnished  him  with  the  meani 
for  indulging  in  a  national  raillery  against  the 
Philistines. 

■What  subjects  of  ostentation  these  conflicts  with 
lions  have  everywhere  been.  Neither  the  great 
Macedonian  nor  the  Roman  Emperors,  could  dis 
pense  with  them.  An  Alexandrian  poet  procured 
for  himself  a  life-long  pension  from  the  Emperor 
Hadrian,  by  showing  him  a  flowering  lotus  sprung 
from  the  blood  of  a  lion  whom  the  Emperor  had 
slain.  (More  definite  references  to  this  and  fol- 
lowing passages,  as  also  discussions  of  them,  will 
be  contained  in  my  Hierozoicon.  Other  material, 
being  already  found  in  Bochart  and  the  older  com- 
mentators (cf.  Serarius  ad  locum),  may  here  be 
passed  over.)  The  extravagance  of  the  later  writ- 
ers of  romance,  both  eastern  and  western,  was  nc 
longer  content  with  common  lion-encounters  fo. 
their  heroes.  The  Arabian  Antar  conquers  a  lion 
although  the  hero's  feet  are  fettered.  For  Rustem 
and  Wolfdieterich  such  exploits  are  performed  even 
by  their  horses.  It  was  only  when  the  crusades 
put  the  knightly  spirit  to  the  test  in  the  land  of 
the  lion,  that  Europeans  experienced  the  historical 
terribleness  of  such  conflicts.  And  few  of  them 
had  the  strength  and  resoluteness  of  Godfrey  of 
Bouillon,  who  stood  his  ground  against  a  bear,  or 
of  the  bold  and  powerful  Wicker  von  Schwaben, 
who,  near  Joppa,  killed  a  great  lion  with  the  sword 
in  his  hand  (Albert  Aquensis,  vii.  70;  Wilken, 
Gesch.  der  KreuzzUae,  ii.  109).  Yet  these  men 
are  not  myths,  because  such  deeds  are  ascribed  to 
them  ;  nor  do  we  suspect  only  mythical  echoes  in 
the  stories  that  are  told  of  them. 

The  deed  of  Samson  is  executed  with  such  ease 
and  freedom,  and  represented  with  such  simplicity 
and  naturalness,  that  if  the  narrative  were  not 
historical,  it  would  be  impossible  to  account  for  its 
origin.  And  yet,  according  to  some,  it  is  a  myth- 
ical reflection  of  the  legend  concerning  Hercules. 
The  theories  of  these  critics  have  their  false  basis 
in  the  Hellenistic  one-sidedness  by  which  the  rela- 
tion, according  to  which  the  myth  must  receive  its 
symbols  from  nature  and  history,  is  often  quite 
reversed,  so  that  historical  life-utterances  are  at- 
tenuated into  ideas  and  mythical  phantasies.  It  is 
as  easy  to  show  that  every  lion-conqueror,  down  to 
Ge'rard  of  our  own  days, — yea,  that  all  menag- 
eries to  the  contrary  "notwithstanding,  the  lion 
himself  must  be  declared  mythical,  as  it  is  to  prove 
that  Samson's  encounter  with  a  lion,  in  a  region 
where  the  animal  was  then  indigenous,  related 
without  the  least  approach  to  ostentation,  and  p3r 


196 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


formed  in  the  greatness  of  an  unassuming  spirit, 
cannot  be  historical. 

Ver.  8.  And  after  a  time  he  returned.  The 
betrothal  had  taken  place,  the  wedding  was  to  fol- 
low.1 Samson  and  his  parents  descended  the  same 
road  again.  As  the  hero  came  to  the  spot  where 
on  their  recent  journey  he  turned  off  from  the 
road,  and  had  the  adventure  with  the  lion,  the  in- 
cident came  again  into  his  mind,  and  he  turned 
aside  once  more,  in  order  to  see  what  had  become 
of  the  dead  lion.  Then  he  found  that  a  swarm  of 
bees  had  settled  themselves  in  the  skeleton  of  the 
beast. 

The  swarm  of  bees  is  significantly  spoken  of  as 

the  0,~}3'!T  HIV,  the  congregation  of  bees.  Com- 
monly, f"IT5  designates  the  congregation  of  the 
Israelitish  people,  as  regulated  by  the  law.  It  is 
only  on  account  of  its  wonderful  social  organiza- 
tion that  a  swarm  of  bees,  but  no  other  brute 
multitude,"  was  denoted  by  the  same  name.3 
polio,  in  his  work  on  Hieroglyphics  (lib.  i.  6 
informs  us  that  when  the  Egyptians  wished  to  pic- 
ture the  idea  of  a  people  of  law  (irf&riviov  \aiv), 
they  did  it  by  the  figure  of  a  bee.  • 

The  skeleton  of  the  lion  had  been  thoroughly 
dried  up  by  the  heat,  for  which  process,  as  Oed- 
mann4  long  ago  remarked,  scarcely  twenty-four 
hours  are  required  in  the  East.  In  this  case  many 
days  had  intervened.  That  bees  readily  settle  in 
situ:itions  like  the  present,  long  since  freed  from 
all  offensive  odors,  is  well  known  from  what  ex- 
positors have  adduced  from  Bochart  and  others. 
The  instance  of  the  swarm  found  settled  in  the 
head  of  the  slain  Onesilaus,  in  Amathus,  may  also, 
familiar  as  it  is,  be  alluded  to  (Herodot.  v.  114). 
The  opinion  of  the  ancients,  that  bees  originate 
out  of  the  carcasses  of  steers,  wasps  out  of  those 
of  asses,  and  other  insects  out  of  dead  horses  and 
mules,  may  perhaps  have  some  connection  with 
the  observation  of  phenomena  like  that  which  here 
met  Samson's  eye  (cf.  Voss,  Idololatria,  lib.  iv.  p. 
556,  and  others). 

Bees  must  have  a  place  of  refuge  from  the 
weather.  It  has  been  observed,  in  recent  times, 
that  at  present  the  bees  of  southern  Palestine  are 
smaller  in  size,  and  of  a  lighter  yellow  brown 
color  than  those  of  Germany   (Ritter,  xvi.  283). 

The  term  tT?7,  honey,  is  connected  with  i"H13?, 
bee  (by  an  interchange  of  r  and  s).  It  is  a  re- 
markable fact,  to  which  I  have  already  directed 
attention  in  my  Berlin  Wochenblatt,  1863,  that  our 
German  [and  by  consequence,  our  English]  names 
for  wax  and  honey  are  perfectly  identical  with  the 
Semitic  terms  for  the  same  objects,  although  in  an 

inverted  relation.  The  Hebrew  tC??  (pronounce  : 
dvash),  honey,  answers  to  the  German  Wachs  (O. 
H.  G.  wahs),  English,  "wax;"  and  the  Hebrew 

33T?  (donacj),  wax,  to  the  German  Honig  (konec) 
English,  "  honey  ;  "  and  this  is  the  only  proper  ex- 
planation to  be  given  of  the  etymology  of  these 
German  words. 


Ver.  9.  And  he  took  thereof. 


The  word  rm, 


according  to  my  view,  has  nothing  to  do  eithei 
with  a  signification  "  to  tread,"  or  with  the  idea 
of  "seizing,"  "making  one's  self  master  of;  "  but 
has  preserved  its  original  meaning  in  the  later 
usus  linguae  of  the  Mishna  and  Talmud,  where  it 
bears  the  signification  "  to  draw  out,"  as  bread  is 
drawn  out  of  the  oven.  The  examples  given  by 
Buxtorff  are  borrowed  from  the  Aruch  of  R.  Na- 
than (172  a),  where  they  may  be  found  still  more 

plain.     Of   bread  in  the  oven  it  is  said,    nTH 

7D2  ini31,  "  it  is  drawn  out  and  put  into  the 
basket."  R.  Nathan  also  justly  explains  our  pas- 
sage by  this  signification.  For  Samson,  in  like 
manner,  drew  the  honeycomb  out  of  the  hive,  and 

put  it  on  the  palm  of  his  hand  (H?)-  Kimchi 
takes  it  in  the  same  way  (in  his  dictionary  of 
roots,   sub  voce,   near    the    close).      Hence    also, 

m~H3,  mirda,  is  the  oven-fork,  with  which  things 
Hora-  j  are  drawn  out  of  the  fire,  Latin  rutabulum.  It  is 
easily  seen  that  a  widely  diffused  root  comes  to 
view  here  (comp.  forms  like  rutrum,  rutelhtm,  from 
eruo,  erutum,  Greek  pva),  f5uT77p,  pi/o-Ta£a>,  etc.). 

He  drew  out  the  honey,  and  as  he  had  no  other 
vessel,  took  it  on  his  hand,  and  refreshed  himself 
with  it  in  the  heat  of  the  day,  as  Jonathan 
strengthened  himself  with  it  after  the  battle  (1 
Sam.  xiv.  29).  He  also  gave  to  his  parents,  who 
likewise  relished  it;  but  neither  did  he  now  tell 
them  whence  he  had  taken  it.  It  would  have  in- 
volved telling  them  the  history  of  the  encounter 
with  the  lion  ;  and  though  they  might  not  now 
have  been  terrified  by  it,  they  would  doubtless 
have  caused  a  great  deal  of  talk  about  it. 

Roskoff,5  in  his  book  Die  Simsonssage  und  der 
Herahlesmythus,  1860,  p.  65,  thinks  that  the  cir- 
cumstance of  Samson's  eating  of  honey  taken  from 
the  lion's  skeleton,  is  a  proof  that  the  rule  by 
which  the  Nazarite  was  required  to  abstain  from 
anything  unclean  had  not  yet  received  its  later 
extension,  and  that  consequently  the  Mosaic  law 
was  not  yet  in  existence.  We  cannot  regard  this 
position  as  very  well  founded.  For  this  reason,  if 
no  other,  that  the  Book  which  is  intimately  ac- 
quainted with  the  Mosaic  law,  relates  this  act  of 
Samson  without  the  addition  of  any  explanatory 
remark.  And  it  has  very  good  reason  for  adding 
no  explanation  ;  for  the  objection  proceeds  upon  a 
view  of  Samson's  Nazaritie  character  which  is  for- 
eign to  the  Book,  and  greatly  affects  the  proper 
understanding  of  his  history.  The  truth  is,  the 
hero  was  not  at  all  such  a  Nazarite  as  the  sixth 
chapter  of  Numbers  contemplates.  The  introduc- 
tion to  his  history  clearly  shows  that  definite  pre- 
scriptions concerning  food  and  drink  were  given 
onlv  to  his  mother;  concerning  himself,6  nothing 
more  is  said  than  that  no  razor  is  to  come  upon 
his  head.  It  is  only  upon  this  latter  obligation, 
as  the  history  shows,  that  the  strength  of  his  Naz- 
ariteship  depends.  The  Nazariteship,  abstractly 
considered,  is  an  image  of  the  general  priesthood. 
On  Samson  particularly  there  rests  a  glimmer  of 
that  gospel  freedom,  with  reference  to  which  the 
Apostle  says  to   the  disciples :    "  All   things   are 


1  The  assumption  of  earlier  expositors,  that  an  interval 
of  a  year  must  elapse  between  betrothal  and  marriage,  is 
after  all  but  an  arbitrary  one. 

S  [Tbe  exception  in  Ps.  lxviii.  31  (30),  is  only  apparent. 

C^^SM  jTT3?,  H  the  congregation  of  bullocks,"  like  the 
beast  of  the  reed,''  Is  a  metaphorical  mode  of  designating 
body  of  men  —  Ta., 


8  Hence  also  the  Sept.  crwaywyi- 

4  Venn ischt e  Samml.  aus  der  Natur/cunde,  vi.  135.  Roeen- 
muller,  Morgtnland,  No.  462. 

6  On  a  general  refutation  of  whom  we  canoot  here  enter 
He  agrees  in  his  results,  for  the  most  part,  with  BertheM 
and  Ewald. 

6  Jerusalem  Talmud,  "Nazir,"  cap.  1,  Hal.  2,  etc. 


CHAPTER   XIV.     10-14. 


19" 


yours."  From  the  consecration  of  his  spirit,  Sam- 
>on  has  a  typical  strength  by  which  to  the  pure  all 
things  are  pure.  Samson  can  do  everything,  and 
that,  as  the  ancients  explained  of  their  Samson- 
Nazarite.  without  sin-offerings  ;  only  one  thing  he 
may  not  do,  —  desecrate  this  his  consecration,  sin 
against  this  spirit  itself.  But  this  his  freedom  is 
naturally  held  within  bounds  by  his  calling.  It 
must  have  war  against  the  Philistines  for  its  cause 
and  goal.  The  Apostle's  meaning  is,  All  things 
are  yours,  if  ye  be  Christ's.  Samson  may  do 
everything,  when  the  honor  of  his  God  against  the 
hereditary  enemy  is  at  stake.  This  freedom  was 
given  him,  not  that  he  might  live  riotously,  as  with 
Delilah  —  for  which  reason  he  fell  —  but  only  to 
do  battle.  Herein  lies  the  key  to  the  profound 
observation  of  the  narrator,  when  the  parents  of 
Samson  did  not  approve  of  his  proposed  marriage 
with  the  woman  of  Timnah  :  "  They  knew  not 
that  this  was  an  occasion  from  God."  The  whole 
Samson  was  an  occasion  from  God  against  the 
Philistines.  It  is  therefore  also  with  a  profound 
purpose  that  the  hero  himself  is  not  commanded 
to  abstain  from  wine  and  unclean  things.  He  is 
born,  to  a  certain  extent,  in  a  state  of  pure  conse- 
cration, in  which  for  the  ends  of  this  consecration 
everything  becomes  pure  to  him.  He  continues  to 
be  the  hero,  even  when  he  eats  that  which  is  un- 
clean, and  marries  foreign  women,  which  yet, 
according  to  ch.  iii.  6,  forms  one  of  the  causes  of 
divine  judgments ;  but  he  falls,  when  in  divulging 
his  secret  he  does  that  which,  though  not  in  itself 
forbidden,  profanes  his  consecration. 

Samson's  character,  in  that  spiritual  freedom 
which  makes  war  on  the  Philistines,  is  a  type  of 
the  true  Christian  freedom,  —  so  long  as  it  does 
not  consume  itself. 

It  would  therefore  lead  to  useless  hair-splitting, 
to  inquire  whether  it  was  right  in  Samson  to  bring 
of  the  honey  to  his  parents  without  telling  them 
whence  he  had  taken  it.  He  brought  it  as  an  evi- 
dence of  his  childlike  heart,  and  committed  no 
wrong.  It  was  a  Talmudic  question,  whether  the 
honey  was  unclean,  although  the  rule  enjoined  on 
Samson's  mother  extended  only  to  the  time  of  her 
son's  birth.  He  was  silent  about  the  history  of 
the  honey,  in  order  to  avoid  boasting. 


HOIOLETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

Samson  is  stronger  than  lions  and  more  cun- 
ning than  foxes.  He  must  be  this  in  order  to 
conquer  the  Philistines.  For  there  is  no  one  to 
assist  him.  The  Philistines  have  enervated,  terri- 
fied, desecrated  Israel.     Israel,  on  their  account, 


has  no  more  faith  in  its  faith.  It  is  afraid  of  the 
strength  of  its  own  spirit.  Desirous  of  peace  al 
any  price,  it  has  surrendered  even  its  own  senti- 
ments and  beliefs. 

Beautiful,  on  this  account,  is  the  use  which  the 
ancient  church  made  of  Samson  the  Lion-slayer  as 
a  type  of  Christ.  The  rending  lion  is  also  an 
image  of  Satan,  the  destroyer  of  men.  As  Sam- 
son rends  the  lion's  jaws  asunder  with  his  hands, 
so  Christ  tears  to  pieces  the  kingdom  of  Satan  and 
death.  Hence  the  old  custom  of  putting  the  picture 
of  Samson  the  Lion-conqueror  on  church  doors. 
But  that  lion  who  goes  about  seeking  to  snatcv  us 
away  from  Christ  is  still  ever  terrible.  The  batiie 
with  him  is  still  daily  new.  The  victory,  however, 
is  sure,  if  only  we  believe  in  the  conquest  of  the 
true  Samson.  But  if  we  have  the  Spirit  only  on 
our  tongues,  and  not  in  our  souls,  we  shall  never 
conquer  like  Him.  Only  faith  will  enable  us  to 
stand.  But  every  victory  flows  with  honey;  and 
with  it  we  refresh  father  and  mother.  Every  new 
victory  strengthens  the  old  love. 

Starke  :  They  who  do  the  greatest  works,  maka 
the  least  noise  and  boasting  about  them.  Enmity 
and  war  are  easily  begun,  but  not  so  easily  ended. 
The  Philistines  could  readily  make  an  enemy  of 
Samson,  but  to  make  a  friend  of  him  was  more 
difficult.  —  The  Same  :  Christian,  imitate,  not 
Samson's  deed,  but  his  faith  and  obedience. — 
Li  sco :  Samson's  life  and  deeds  can  be  rightly 
judged  only  when  viewed,  not  as  those  of  a  private 
person,  but  as  the  activity  of  a  theocratic  deliverer 
and  judge. 

[Wordsworth  :  "  He  told  not  his  father  or  his 
mother,"  though  they  were  not  far  from  him  at 
the  time  (ver.  5).  So  our  Lord  would  not  that 
any  one  should  spread  abroad  his  fame.  He  said, 
"  Tell  no  man  "  (Matt.  viii.  4 ;  xvi.  20).  Hitherto, 
then,  Samson,  in  his  spiritual  gifts,  in  his  self- 
dedication  to  God,  in  his  strength,  courage,  and 
victory,  and  in  his  meekness  and  humility,  is  an 
eminent  type  of  Christ.  But  afterwards  he  de- 
generates, and  becomes  in  many  respects  a  contrast 
to  Him.  And  thus,  in  comparing  the  type  and 
the  antitype,  we  have  both  encouragement  and 
warning,  especially  as  to  the  right  use  to  be  made 
of  spiritual  gifts,  and  as  to  the  danger  of  their 
abuse.  —  Bp.  Hall  :  The  mercies  of  God  are  ill 
bestowed  upon  us,  if  we  cannot  step  aside  to  view 
the  monuments  of  his  deliverances;  dangers  may 
be  at  once  past  and  forgotten.  As  Samson  had 
not  found  his  honeycomb,  if  he  had  not  turned 
aside  to  see  his  lion,  so  we  shall  lose  the  comfoi  t 
of  God's  benefits,  if  we  do  not  renew  our  perils  by 
meditation.  —  Tr.] 


Samson's  wedding-feast.     He  proposes  a  riddle  to  his  companions. 
Chapter  XIV.  10-14.  \ 


10  So  [And]  his  father  went  down  unto  the  woman:  and  Samson  made  there  a 

11  feast;  for  so  used  [it  is  customary  for]  the  young  men  to  do.  And  it  came  to 
pass,  when  they  saw  him,  that  they  brought  [chose]  thirty  companions  to  be  with 

12  him.  And  Samson  said  unto  them,  I  will  now  put  forth  a  riddle  unto  you  :  if  ye 
can  certainly  [if  ye  indeed]  declare  it  me  within  the  seven  days  of  the  feast,  and 
find  it  out,  the!  I  will  give  you  thirty  sheets  [shirts]  l  and  thirty  change  [changes] 


198 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


13  of  garments  But  if  ye  cannot  declare  it  me,  then  shall  ye  give  me  thirty  sheets 
[shirts]  and  thirty  change  [changes]  of  garments.     And  they  said  unto  him,  Put 

14  forth  thy  riddle,  that  we  may  hear  it.  And  he  said  unto  them,  Out  of  the  eater 
came  forth  meat,  and  out  of  the  strong  came  forth  sweetness.  And  they  could  not 
in  three  days  expound  the  riddle. 

TEXTUAL    AND  GRAMMATICAL. 
II  Ver.  12.  —  C^S^D.     Dr.  Cassel  translates  this  word  by  the  general  term  Gewandt,  garments.    He  apparently  con« 
riders  the  only  distinction  between  the  C2TO  and  the  D'HISl  ]"ft bfl,  to  be  that  between  common  and  more  costly 
garments  (see  below).     But  the  D^^Tp  are  probably  under-garments,  tunica,  shirts,  made  of  a  fine  linen.     The  deri- 
vation of  the  word  I'HD.  and  whether  it  be  related  to  the  Greek  o-iVoW  (Sept.),  can  hardly  be  determined.  — Th.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  10.  And  his  father  went  down  unto  the 
woman.  The  whole  narrative  is  full  of  naive  de- 
lineations of  manners  and  customs.  The  father's 
present  visit  to  the  maiden  is  in  his  son's  behalf, 
and  expresses  the  parental  approbation  of  Sam- 
son's marriage  engagement.  That  the  parents  of 
the  bride  were  consulted  about  the  marriage  is  not 
indicated  in  any  way,  although  we  know  that  the 
father  was  still  living  (cf.  ch.  xv.  6).  Arewe  to 
suppose  that  among  the  Philistines  an  application 
to  the  parents  was  unnecessary  ?  Did  not  Isaac, 
through  Eliezer,  make  suit  for  Rebecca  to  her 
father  ?  and  Jacob  to  Laban  ?  Was  not  the  same 
custom  current  also  among  other,  heathen  nations  ? 
Is  not  the  young  woman  in  the  nuptial  song  of 
Catullus  (Carmen,  xii.  ver.  61)  exhorted  that  it  is 
the  father  and  mother  who  must  be  obeyed  % 1  The 
Philistine  women  seem  really  to  have  enjoyed  a 
position  of  great  social  freedom.  They  are  seen  on 
the  street,  and  are  visited  by  men,  without  being 
on  that  account  regarded  as  "  harlots." 

And  Samson  made  there  a  feast ;  for  such  is 
the  custom  of  young  men.  He  did  not  take  her 
with  him  into  his  father's  house,2  after  the  mar- 
riage was  settled,  but  remained  in  Timnah,  and 
there  gave  the  feast.  Among  the  Philistines  it  was 
customary  for  the  bridegroom  (~fln3)  to  arrange 
the  banquet.  At  the  wedding  of  Cana,  also,  de- 
scribed by  St.  John  (eh.  ii.  10),  the  bridegroom 
seems  to  have  been  the  entertainer.  But  this  was 
not  the  ease  when  Laban  gave  his  daughter  to 
Jacob,  or  when  Tobias  married  the  daughter  of 
Raguel  (Tobit,  viii.  19).  In  those  instances,  the 
parents  of  the  bride  give  the  feast. 

Marriage  feasts  were  much  liked  among  all  na- 
tions. When,  in  the  Odyssey  (iv.  3),  Telemachus 
comes  to  king  Menelaus,  the  latter  is  just  cele- 
brating the  nuptial  feasts  of  his  children.  Among 
the  Romans,  the  name  repolia  3  was  in  use  for  the 
entertainments  which  (according  to  Festus)  were 
given  on  the  dav  after  the  marriage  at  the  new 
husband's  house  (cf.  Horace,  Sat.  ii.  60).  Plutarch 
makes  the  question,  Why  even  law-givers  have 
appointed  a  certain  degree  of  luxury  to  be  ob- 
served in  connection  with  such  feasts,  a  subject  of 
discussion  in  his  Symposium  (lib.  iv.quaest.  3).  Sam- 
son's marriage-celebration  lasted  seven  days.  The 
parents-in-law  of  Tobias,  in  their  joy,  appropriated 
fourteen  days.  But  down  to  late  times  luxury  and 
lensuality  are  more  characteristic  of  such  feasts 

1  (Juibus  parert  necesse  est. 

2  Because  she  was  an  alien  He  does  not  impose  upon 
his  father's  house  that  in  which  he  allows  himself.  That 
would  have  been  an  insrlt  to  the  law  and  customs  of 
linai. 


than  is  compatible  with  their  proper  observance 
Neither  the  spirit  of  Samson,  nor  the  piety  of 
Tobias  fills  and  governs  them,  albeit  in  some  in- 
stances the  duration  of  those  ancient  celebrations 
may  be  rivaled.  We  hardly  seem  to  have  taken  a 
long  leap  backward,  when  in  the  fourteenth  century 
we  hear  it  provided  by  the  Ravensburg  Regulation 
concerning  weddings,  that  "  the  nuptial  celebration 
shall  only  last  till  the  next  day,  no  longer"  (Bir- 
linger,  VolksthOmlkhes,  ii.  399)";  or  when,  in  1643, 
the  Wurtzburg  bishop,  John  Philip,  orders  that 
the  custom  of  protracting  banquets  through  three 
days  be  discontinued,  "as  a  useless  and  hurtful 
expense"  (Schaltjahr,  i.  445).  For  even  in  our 
day,  like  excesses  occur,  wherever  there  is  money 
and  wantonness.  So  late  as  ten  years  ago,  it  was 
stated  that  in  Swabia  the  feasting  attendant  upon 
a  village  wedding  still  frequently  lasted  from  four 
to  five  days  (Meier,  Schwab.  Sagen,  p.  479). 

Ver.  1 1 .  And  when  they  saw  him,  they  chose 
thirty  companions,  "who  were  with  him.  A 
bridegroom  is  like  a  king's  son.  His  wedding  is 
his  coronation.  Hence,  also,  crown  and  chaplet 
are  not  wanting  for  the  wedded  pair.  For  the 
same  reason  they  have  also  a  following.  These 
are  ancient,  universally  diffused  ideas,  which  it 
would  lead  us  too  far  to  collect  together  from  all 
nations  and  languages.  In  comparatively  recent 
times,  the  Jews  have  minutely  traced  the  analogy 
of  the  bridegroom  with  the  king,  through  all  the 
customs  pertaining  to  them  respectively,  even  to 

the  point  of  calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  ]'"jn 
and  TJ?p  have  each  three  letters.  (On  the  proofs 
that  "pOv  nOll  "\r\r\,  compare  the  litnrgir^I 
works,  of  which  Tania,  ed.  Cremona,  1565,  p.  '.30, 
and  Taschbaz,  of  R.  Meier  of  Rotenburg,  p.  45, 
may  here  be  especially  cited. ) 

Accordingly,  the  QniS~3,  "when  they  saw 
him,"  is  to  be  so  understood,  that  when  Samson  ap- 
peared, i.  e.  publicly,  both  at  the  time  of  the  mar- 
riage, concerning  the  manner  of  which  nothing  is 
said,  and  during  the  seven  festive  days,  it  was 
always  with  a  retinue  of  thirty  companions,  some- 
what as  in  our  day  brides  are  still  attended  by  suites 
of  bridesmaids. 

^npf  1,  and  they  chose.  It  was  customary,  no 
doubt,  when  a  daughter  or  son  of  the  city  was 
married,  for  the  bridegroom  to  provide  himse'ii 
with  a  retinue.     As  Samson  was  a  stranger,  his 

8  "An  after  drinking."  The  Sept.  renders  n£!t5?3 
(ver.  10)  by  norm,  a  drinking. 

4  Cf.  Jalkut,  Shophelim,  n.  70,  p.  11  c. 


CHAPTER   XIV.    10-14. 


199 


bride  and  her  father  told  him  whom  to  invite,  and 
therefore  the  writer  says  "  they  chose."  The  num- 
ber of  young  men  chosen  was  thirty.  Samson's 
parents  seem  to  have  been  in  good  circumstances, 
and  hence  the  bridegroom  appeared  not  without 
splendor,  as  the  giver  of  a  seven  days'  feast.  That 
thirty  was  the  unvarying  number,  cannot  be  main- 
tained. The  ancients  had  a  philosophical  num- 
ber, which  they  called  the  "wedding,"  and  which 
consisted  of  five  or  six.  (Both  chosen  on  account 
of  their  being  formed  from  2X3  and  2+3,  one 
even,  the  other  odd.)  But  5  X  6  is  also  =  30.1 
In  later  times,  also,  the  Jews  had  many  brides'- 
men.  In  Worms,  their  number  had  been  restricted 
to  eight.     The  later  Jews  called  such  a  brides'- 

man  'p2t£7B7,  which  term  does  not,  however,  come 
from  the  Syriac,  as  Sachs  thought  (BeitrOge,  i.  82), 
but  is  only  the  Hebraized  form  of  sponsor  (other- 
wise auspex,  paranymphios,  cf.  Matt.  ix.  15).  —  The 
idea  of  Josephus,  which  Bertheau  adopts,  that  the 
thirty  young  men  were  to  watch  Samson,  is  to  be 
rejected.  For,  in  the  first  place,  nothing  was  as 
yet  known  concerning  Samson  that  could  render 
him  so  seriously  suspected ;  and,  in  the  next  place, 
it  is  manifest  from  ver.  15,  that  they  were  invited 
on  the  part  of  the  bridegroom  himself. 

Vers.  12,  13.  I  will  put  forth  a  riddle  unto 
you.  The  custom  of  propounding  riddles  for 
amusement  is  very  ancient.  The  acuteness  which 
exercised  itself  therein,  was,  as  it  were,  the  coun- 
terpart of  that  which  invented  the  language  of 
figure,  signs,  and  symbols.  For  it  brought  to  light 
again  the  secrets  which  the  latter  had  locked  up. 
"  In  ancient  times,"  says  Plutarch,  "  the  Greeks 
were  already  in  the  habit  of  propounding  riddles 
to  each  other."  It  is  related  of  the  maiden  Cleob- 
uline,  the  daughter  of  a  wise  man,  that  she  was 
so  ingenious,  as  to  play  with  riddles  as  if  they 
were  dice,  propounding  or  solving  them  with  equal 
ease.  The  banquet  of  the  seven  wise  men,  in  Plu- 
tarch, shows  the  high  estimation  in  which  the 
diversion  was  held ;  and  Cleodemns,  the  physician, 
who  was  unskillful  at  solving  riddles,  is  not  un- 
aptly rebuked  by  iEsop,  for  holding  such  occupa- 
tion to  be  suitable  only  for  girls  when  engaged  in 
knitting  girdles  and  hoods,  but  not  for  intelligent 
men.  Athenajus,  also,  in  his  work  (pp.  453—459), 
cites  large  extracts  from  the  book  of  Clearchus  on 
riddles,  and  adds,  "  that  the  unraveling  of  such 
riddles  is  very  similar  to  the  pursuit  of  philosophy, 
and  that  therefore  their  solution,  as  a  sign  of  wis- 
dom, is  held  in  favor,  and  deemed  an  appropriate 
mode  of  entertainment  at  table."  We,  however, 
pass  fcy  these  examples  from  Clearchus,  not  only 
because  they  were  already  brought  to  the  notice 
of  expositors  by  Bochart,  but  especially  because 
in  the  case  of  Samson's  riddle  the  real  stake  at 
•ssue  is  higher  than  a  garland  for  the  winner,  or 
the  drinking  of  a  forfeit-cup2  by  the  loser.  It 
evokes  a  stern  conflict. 

Then  I  will  give  you  thirty  garments  (C,3',"Tp) 
and  thirty  changes  of  raiment  (CIS?  nt"1  ,  n). 
With  this  explanation,  the  more  recent  expositors 
would  probably  agree.  By  a  "  change "  of  rai- 
ment we  are  to  understand  a  dress  of  state — a 

1  Cf.  Plutarch,  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Timtzus  concern- 
ing the  origin  of  souls. 

2  [That  is,  a  cup  of  unmixed  wine,  or  of  wine  mixed 
ivith  salt-water,  to  be  emptied  at  one  draught.  See  Smith's 
Diet.  Antiq.,  s.  v.  t(  Symposium."  It  will  be  remembered 
that  the  Greeks  always  mingled  water  with  their  wine. 
Tfcey  considered  it  not  only  unhealthy,  but  ban  irous,  to 


Sunday  suit,  as  we  would  say  —  for  which  the 
every-day  dress  may  be  exchanged  on  festive  occa 
sions.  The  Targum,  however,  has  another  expla- 
nation, which  deserves  to  be  mentioned.     Like  the 

Septuagint  and  Josephus,  it  translates    H-VO 

(changes)  by  n>7l2^iS,  0-T0A77;  assuming  thereby 

for  *17n,  a  signification  which  indeed  it  sometimes 
seems  to  have,  namely,  to  fight,  to  wound  (Sept 
iraraffO'eii',  TtTpuHTKeiv).  For  ot6\t\  is  the  classical 
term   for   a   soldier's  dress.     In   like   manner,   it 

translates  Q'O'Hp  by  Q^DlvS,  i.  e.  balteus,  the 
girdle  or  belt  which  the  soldier  buckled  around 
his  body  (cf.  2  K.  v.  23).  —  It  was  thus  no  small 
price  that  was  put  upon  the  solution  of  the  riddle. 
But  in  other  cases  also  it  was  probably  not  un- 
usual for  large  sums  to  be  staked.  Thus,  if  we 
are  to  believe  Dius,  quoted  by  Josephus  (Antiq. 
viii.  5,  3 ;  cf.  Jablonski,  Pantheon  JEgypt.,  Proleg., 
p.  cxiv),  Solomon  and  Hiram  lost  a  great  deal 
of  money  to  each  other.  Plutarch  relates  how  that 
the  Ethiopian  king  staked  many  cities  and  villages 
on  a  riddle  propounded  to  Amasis,  and  would  have 
won  them,  had  not  the  philosophical  Bias  come  to 
the  aid  of  the  Egyptian  monarch.  It  was  in  con- 
sequence of  solving  a  riddle  that  the  legendary 
Persian  hero  was  permitted  to  marry  Rudabe,  the 
mother  of  Rustem.  According  to  ancient  Scandi- 
navian law,  criminals  could  save  themselves  from 
death  by  means  of  a  riddle  (Olin  Dalin,  Gesch. 
Schwede?ts,  German,  i.  155).  The  same  idea  oc- 
curs in  German  riddle-books  (Simrock,  Rttthsel- 
buch,  p.  463;  Menzel,  d.  Dichtung,  i.  427).  —  King 
Heidrik  in  Ridgotland  had  a  severe  war  with 
Gester  Blinde,  king  in  Gothland.  Finally,  he 
challenged  him  to  solve  riddles.  The  latter  in 
voked  Odin,  and  conquered  (Olin  Dalin,  i.  186). 

Ver.  14.  Out  of  the  consumer  came  material 
for  consumption,  and  out  of  the  terrible  came 
sweetness.     The  translator  must  take  care  not  to 

destroy  the  ambiguity  of  the  term  7DS,  consumer. 
For  this  reason,  the  rendering  of  De  Wette  and 
Arnheim,  "  vom  Fresser  kommt  Frass "  [from  the 
feeder  comes  feed],  is  not  good ;  for,  on  the  one 
hand.  Frass  [feed,  a  term  used  onlv  for  the  food 
of  beasts] 3  is  not  applicable  to  the  honey  which  is 
meant,  and  on  the  other  hand,  human  beings  [do 
not  feed,  but]  eat.  Ewald's  rendering,  "  aus  dem 
Esser  kam  ein  Essen "  [out  of  the  eater  came  an 
eating,  i.  e.  something  eatable],  is  unsuitable,  be- 
cause the  lion,  who  is  meant,  is  not  an  Esser,  eater, 
nor  yet  as  Bertheau  renders,  a  Speiser  [both  terms 
being  used  of  human  beings  only].  Equally  erro- 
neous is  it  to  translate  ^  by  "  sour."    For  the 

antithesis  between  this  word  and  P^HO  is  here  to 
be  taken  in  a  wider  sense,  so  as  to  give  rise  to 
a  second  equivoque :  for  p1i~lC  means  not  only 
"  sweet,"  but  metaphorically  also  "  pleasant," 
agreeable.  The  ingenuity  of  the  riddle  consists 
precisely  in  this,  that  the  ambiguity  both  of  its  Ian 
guage  and  contents  can  be  turned  in  every  direc 
tion,  and  thus  conceals  the  answer.  It  is  like  a 
knot  whose  right  end  cannot  be  found,  —  a  figure 

drink  clear  wine,  which  may  suggest  an  explanation  of  the 
above-mentioned  penalty.  —  Tr.] 

3  [In  German,  the  act  of  eating  on  the  part  of  beasts  If 
called  Jressen ;  on  the  part  of  human  beings,  essen  Of 
speisen.  The  nearest  approach  we  have  to  this  distinctioi 
in  English  is  between  feeding  and  eating.  —  Tr.] 


200 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


from  which  the  sense  of  the  Hebrew  "TVT,  to  pro- 
pose a  riddle,  as  also  that  of  the  Greek  yp7<pos  (cf. 
yoiiros,  the  braided  fishing  net),  is  doubtless  to  be 
derived.  The  Gordian  knot  was  likewise  an  em- 
blematical riddle.  Samson's  problem  distinguishes 
itself  only  by  its  peculiar  ingenuity.  It  is  short 
and  simple,  and  its  words  are  used  in  their  natural 

signification  (7J3S  is  to  consume,  in  general,  with- 
out regard  to  the  specific  form  or  nature  of  the 
consumption,  and  fV  is  terrible,  as  "  the  strong 
one,"  whether  in  a  good  or  evil  sense,  always  is). 
It  is  so  clear  as  to  be  obscure.  It  is  not  properly 
liable  to  the  objection,  that  it  refers  to  an  historical 
act  which  no  one  could  know.  The  act  is  one 
which  was  natural  in  that  country.  Its  turning- 
point,  with  reference  to  the  riddle,  was,  not  that  it 
was  an  incident  of  Samson's  personal  history,  but 
that  its  occurrence  in  general  was  not  impossible. 

The  ingenuity  of  the  riddle  shows  itself  further 
in  that  it  applies  equally  well  both  to  an  historical 
occurrence  and  a  mere  abstract  conception.  This 
was  a  characteristic  of  ancient  popular  riddles  in 
general,  and  indicates  their  origin.  Just  as  it  was 
an  art  to  represent  historical  facts  symbolically  by 
pictures  (of  which  the  modern  rebus  is  an  insipid 


distortion),  so  it  was  an  art  out  of  such  abstrac 
tions  to  disinter  an  historical  fact.  Most  popular 
riddles  call  for  the  exercise  of  this  art.  The  in- 
stance showing  most  likeness  to  the  riddle  pro- 
posed by  Samson,  is  found  in  a  story  current  in 
North  Germany,  and  communicated  by  MiillenhorT 
(Sagen,  p.  504) :  A  man  was  condemned  to  death. 
His  wife  intercedes  for  him.  The  judges  offer  to 
let  him  go,  if  she  can  propose  a  riddle  which  they 
shall  not  be  able  to  solve.     The  woman  says  :  — 

tf  .45  ik  hin  gang,  as  ik  wedder  kamt 
Den  Lebendigen  ik  uet  den  Doden  nam. 
Suss  (Sechs)  de  gungen  de  Saewten  (den  Siebenten)  quittf 
Raet  to}  gy  Henen,  nu  ist  Tyt."  1 

The  woman  had  found  the  carcass  of  a  horse 
by  the  way,  and  in  it  a  bird's-nest,  and  in  the  nest 
six  young  birds.  The  six  young  ones  she  took 
with  her,  whereby  these  became  quit  of  the  sev- 
enth ;  and  thus  she  had  taken  the  living  out  of  tha 
dead.  It  went  with  the  wise  judges  even  as  it 
did  with  the  proud  Philistines  —  they  guessed 
nothing. 

1  ["  As  I  came  along,  I  took  the  living  out  of  the  dead ; 
six  got  quit  of  the  seventh  ;  guess  away,  my  masters,  now 
is  the  time."  —  Te.] 


The  Philistines  solve  the  riddle  by  means  of  treachery.     Samson's  anger  and  payment 

of  the  forfeit. 

Chapter  XIV.  15-20. 

15  And  it  came  to  pass  on  the  seventh  day,  that  they  said1  unto  Samson's  wife.  En- 
tice [Persuade]  thy  husband,  that  he  may  declare  unto  us  the  riddle,  lest  we  burn 
thee  and  thy  father's  house  with  fire :  have  ye  called  [invited]  us  to  take  that  we 

16  have  [plunder  us]  ?  is  it  not  sof  And  Samson's  wife  wept  before  him  and  said, 
Thou  dost  but  hate  me,  and  lovest  me  not :  thou  hast  put  forth  a  [the]  riddle  unto 
the  children  [sons]  of  my  people,  and  hast  not  told  it  me.     And  he  said  unto  her, 

17  Behold,  I  have  not  told  it  my  father  nor  my  mother,  and  shall  I  tell  it  thee  ?  And 
she  wept  before  him  the  seven  days,  while  their  feast  lasted  [during  which  they  had 
their  feast]  :  and  it  came  to  pass  on  the  seventh  day,  that  he  told  her,  because  she 
lay  sore  upon  him  [pressed  him  hard]  :  and  she  told  the  riddle  to  the  children  [sons] 

18  of  her  people.  And  the  men  of  the  city  said  unto  him  on  the  seventh  day  before 
the  sun  went  down,  What  is  sweeter  than  honey  ?  and  what  is  stronger  than  a 
lion?     And  he  said  unto  them,  If  ye  had  not  ploughed  with  my  heifer,  ye  had  not 

19  found  out  my  riddle.  And  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  came  upon  him,  and 
he  went  down  to  Ashkelon,  and  slew  thirty  men  of  them,  and  took  their  spoil 
[attire],  and  gave  [the]  change  [changes]  of  garments  unto  them  which  expounded 

20  the  riddle.  And  his  anger  was  kindled,  and  he  went  up  to  his  father's  house.  But 
[And]  Samson's  wife  was  given  to  his  companion,  whom  he  had  used  as  his 
friend  [who  had  attended  him]. 

TEXTUAL  AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  15-  —  ^"ljp^l.      Dr.  Cassel  treats  all  that  comes  after  the  phrase,  "and  It  came  to  pass  on  the  seventh  day,'' 

lown  to  the  same  phrase  in  ver.  17,  as  parenthetic,  and  consequently  renders  ?HTpSsl  by  the  pluperfect :  '  an.i  they 
Ud  said."     Cf.  below. —Tb.1 


EXEOETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

The   aesthetic  beauty   and   psychological   truth 
irliich  characterize  the  narrative  notwithstanding 


its  compressed  brevity,  and  which  would  be  incom- 
parable even  though  the  narrative  were  not  found 
in  the  Bible,  and  had  not  divine  truth  for  its  eon- 
tents  and  object,  tin  scarcely  be  adequately  pointed 


CHAPTER    XIV.  15-20. 


201 


rat,  so  manifoldly  do  they  manifest  themselves. 
The  drama  is  represented  with  such  historical  life- 
likeness,  and  its  development  is  so  natural,  that 
while  no  one  could  foresee  why  the  wedding  should 
give  rise  to  a  conflict,  yet  in  the  sequel  it  becomes 
manifest  that  its  occurrence  was  unavoidable. 
Samson  really  loved  the  maiden  of  Timnah,  and 
took  the  full  measure  of  youthful  delight  in  the 
nuptial  banquet  and  festival ;  but  it  is  impossible 
for  an  Israelite,  as  he  is,  to  enter  into  any  kind  of 
close  connection  with  the  enemies  and  oppressors 
of  his  people,  without  getting  into  a  conflict.  It 
must  never  be  supposed  that  covenants,  even  in 
the  simplest  relations  of  life,  can  be  made  with 
those  who  are  opponents  in  principle  and  tyrants 
in  disposition.  No  occasion  is  so  slight,  but  it 
suffices  to  inflame  the  fires  of  antagonism.  Sam- 
son is  too  genial  of  nature  to  be  a  far-seeing  party 
man  ;  but  he  deceived  himself  when  he  expected 
to  find  a  covenant  of  love  and  fidelity  in  a  Philis- 
tine family.  The  preventing  cause  lay  not  only 
in  his  opponents,  but  also  in  himself,  in  that  he 
was  always,  even  unconsciously,  showing  who  he 
was.  Everything  appeared  to  be  harmonious  when 
he  propounded  the  riddle.  He  did  it  in  the  most 
peaceful  spirit,  from  the  impulse  of  an  active  mind. 
But  it  immediately  brought  the  hidden  antagonism 
to  light.  For  they  to  whom  it  was  proposed  for 
solution  were  Philistines.  As  such,  they  would  at 
all  events  be  put  to  shame,  if  they  failed  to  solve 
it.  At  the  same  time,  it  is  true,  the  nobility  of 
Samson's  disposition  reveals  itself,  in  contrast  with 
the  vulgar  natures  of  the  Philistines.  He,  for  his 
part,  risks  thirty  times  the  value  of  what,  in  case 
of  failure,  each  of  the  thirty  has  to  pay.  This  is 
the  very  reason  why,  in  their  covetousness,  they 
accept  the  wager.  The  result  was  natural.  They 
cannot  solve  the  riddle,  but  neither  are  they  will- 
ing to  admit  this.  They  are  too  vain  to  be  hum- 
bled by  an  alien,  but  especially  too  covetous  to 
endure  a  loss.  They  therefore  turn  to  Samson's 
young  wife.  Had  she  not  been  a  Philistine,  they 
would  not  have  dared  to  do  this.  But,  as  it  is, 
they  expect  to  find  in  her  an  ally  against  the 
Israelite,  even  though  he  be  her  husband.  She 
seems  indeed  to  have  resisted  for  a  while,  —  until 
they  arouse  both  her  fears  and  her  vanity.  Her 
fears,  by  the  threat  to  burn  her  father's  house  over 
her  head  ;  her  vanity,  by  hinting  that  probably  the 
riddle  was  only  put  forth  in  order  to  plunder  the 
guests.  The  latter  suspicion  she  may  have  found 
especially  intolerable,  women  being  ever  peculiarly 
sensitive  to  similar  surmises  of  village  slander- 
mongers.  Perhaps,  however,  she  merely  invented 
these  threatening  speeches  afterwards,  in  order  to 
pacify  Samson.  For  else,  why  did  she  not  confess 
the  truth  to  Samson  ?  That  alone  would  have 
ended  the  trouble.  Either  he  would  have  felt  him- 
lelf  strong  enough  to  protect  her,  and  to  humble 
the  miserable  ennnies,  or  he  would  have  consented 
to  the  sacrifice  of  appearing  to  be  vanquished.  But 
she  did  not  do  this,  just  because  she  did  not  forget 
that  she  was  a  Philistine.  Samson,  she  conjec- 
tured, would  not  allow  himself  to  be  humbled. 
She  sought,  therefore,  to  persuade  him  by  means 
.  f  that  very  antagonism  for  the  sake  of  which  she 
betrayed  him.  She  complained,  weeping,  that  he 
still  treated  her  like  her  countrymen,  and  also  kept 
torn  her  that  which  he  would  not  tell  them.  She 
aesires  to  make  it  appear  that  her  love  has  so 
entirely  brought  her  over  to  his  interests,  that  she 
•light  not  to  be  put  on  the  same  footing  with  her 
countrymen.  This  would  have  been  the  right  re- 
lation.    The  wife  may  assist  no  party  but  that  of 


her  husband.  But  she  only  dissembled,  in  order 
to  betray.  Finally,  on  the  seventh  day,  —  the  sun 
was  already  declining,  —  she  had  so  tormented  the 
hero,  that  he  told  it  to  her.  He  had  a  heart  not 
only  great,  but  also  tender,  which  at  last  succumbs 
to  the  prayers  and  tears  of  the  wife  whom  he  loves 
and  holds  to  be  true.  The  treachery  is  completed. 
The  miserable  Philistines  act  as  if  they  had  them- 
selves found  the  solution,  and  claim  the  reward. 
Then  a  light  goes  up  for  Samson.  He  sees  the 
whole  contrast,  —  the  incongruity  and  error  of  a 
covenant  with  Philistines.  Before  the  treason  of 
which  he  has  been  made  the  subject,  the  mists  with 
which  a  seductive  sensuality  had  obscured  his  vis- 
ion are  scattered.  National  wrath  and  national 
strength  awake  within  him.  His  whole  greatness 
reveals  itself.  He  does  not  refuse  the  Philistines 
the  promised  reward.  But  the  manner  in  which 
it  is  given,  is  full  of  contempt  and  humiliation. 
He  throws  to  them  the  spoils  of  thirty  slain  Philis- 
tines. He  leaves  the  woman,  and  returns  to  Israel. 
The  conflict  has  begun,  and  Samson's  true  calling 
becomes  manifest.  He  who  wears  the  consecra- 
tion of  God  on  his  head,  cannot  revel  in  the  houses 
of  Philistines. 

Ver.  15.  And  it  came  to  pass  on  the  seventh 
day.  More  recent  expositors  have  made  no  re- 
marks on  this  difficult  statement.  To  assume  that 
the  Philistines  first  applied  themselves  to  the  wo- 
man on  the  seventh  day,  is  rendered  impossible  by 
ver.  17,  which  says  that  she  wept  before  Samson 
"seven  days."  The  LXX  therefore,  read  here, 
"on  the  fourth  day,"  because  ver.  14  states  that 
for  three  days  they  were  not  able  to  find  the  solu- 
tion. Considering  how  easily  "T  and  f  may  be  in- 
terchanged, the  substitution  of  "  seven  "  for  "  four  " 
appears  very  likely.  But  the  clearer  it  seems  that 
the  reading  should  be,  "on  the  fourth  day,"  the 
more  surprising  it  is  that  the  Masora  retained  "  on 
the  seventh  day."  The  Masora,  however,  supposed 
the  Sabbath  to  be  meant  by  the  seventh  day,  —  an 
opinion  also  followed  by  some  of  the  older  expos- 
itors (cf.  Serarius),  hut  which  cannot  be  correct.1 
For  in  ver.  17  a"  seventh  day  "  is  again  mentioned, 
which  cannot,  however,  be  another  Sabbath  ;  for 
as  the  first  "  seventh  day  "  is,  by  the  supposition, 
the  fourth,  so  this  second  is  the  seventh,  day  of 
the  wedding-feast.  The  reading  "on  the  seventh 
day  "  can  be  retained,  if  the  passage  which  begins 
immediately  after  it  in  ver.  15,  and  extends  to  the 
same  phrase  in  ver.  17,  be  regarded  as  a  sort  of 
parenthesis.  The  writer  was  already  on  the  point 
of  stating  that  after  they  had  ineffectually  puzzled 
over  it  for  three  days,  Samson  on  the  seventh  day 
told  it  to  his  wife,  when  it  occurred  to  him  first  to 
interpose  the  statements  of  vers.  15-17,  as  showing 
the  motives  by  which  Samson  was  influenced.  Ac- 
cordingly, "on  the  seventh  day,"  in  ver.  17,  only 
continues  what  the  same  words  in  ver.  15  had 
begun.  The  statement  in  the  parenthesis  that  she 
wept  before  him  "  seven  days,"  falls  in  with  this 
view.  The  idea  is,  that  from  the  time  at  which 
she  began,  she  continued  to  torment  him  through- 
out the  whole  seven-day  period  of  the  feast. 
Throughout  the  whole  week,  therefore,  instead 
of  cheerful  guests,  Samson  had  sullen  Philistine 
faces,  and,  instead  of  a  happy  wife,  crocodile  tears 
and  reproaches.2 

1  Least  correct  of  all  would  it  be,  with  Lilienthal,  to 
leave  the  words  out  because  the  Konigsberg  MSS.  did  not 
have  them. 

2  [Dr.  Cassel'S  explanation  of  this  matter  does  not  strik* 
me  favorably.     It  certainly  fails  to  justify  the  remark  of 


202 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


Persuade  thy  husband,  that  he  declare  unto 

as  the  riddle.  ^Si  persuade  ;  most  frequently, 
it  is  true,  "  befool,"  "  entice  by  flattery."  Very 
significant  is  the  expression,  "  that  he  declare  unto 
us  the  riddle."  If  he  tells  it  to  her,  they  intimate, 
he  will  nave  told  it  to  them.  For  do  not  they  and 
she  constitute  an  "  us  ? "  She  belongs  to  them, 
and  must  act  accordingly,  if  she  would  not  incur 
their  enmity  against  herself  and  her  house. 
Have  ye  Invited  us  to  plunder  us  ?  is  it  not 

so?     :l3B?1^?n  is  the  kal  infinitive  with  suffix, 

and  is  to  be  derived  from  E??^  to  inherit,  to  get 
by  conquest,  to  take  into  possession.  The  word  is 
aptly  chosen  here.  When  Israel  was  taking  pos- 
session of  the  land,  tE^  was  a  word  in  constant 
use.  The  Philistines  mockingly  ask  whether  they 
were  invited  that  Israel,  in  the  person  of  Sam- 
son, might  "  conquer,"  "  inherit,"  their  property. 

fr^ '£!>  at  the  close,  is  an  interrogative  particle,  like 
the  Latin  ne,  used  enclifically. 

Ver.  16.  Thou  dost  but  hate  me,  ^PHpE?. 
Samson,  she  intimates,  must  look  on  her  as  one 
looks  on  a  person  who  belongs  to  a  hostile  tribe, 
seeing  that  he  conceals  the  solution  of  the  riddle 
from  her  as  well  as  from  the  other  people  of  the 
city.  The  woman,  pressed  to  decide  between  her 
people  and  Samson,  inclines  to  the  Philistines.  A 
lesson  for  Samson  and  others  like  him. 

Behold,  I  have  not  told  it  my  father  nor  my 
mother.  It  is  true,  he  deferred  not  to  father  and 
mother  in  the  matter  of  his  marriage,  but  not  from 
want  of  reverence  for  them.  They  are  his  most 
beloved.  To  them  he  brings  of  the  honey.  ( Very 
insipidly,  Josephus  adds  here  that  he  brought 
honey  to  the  woman  also.)  And  the  woman,  in 
the  midst  of  her  flatteries  and  tears,  must  endure 
to  hear  him  say  to  her  :  Have  I  not  told  it  to  my 
parents,  and  shall  I  tell  it  to  thee  ?  To  be  sure,  it 
would  have  been  inexcusable  to  have  put  his  par- 
ents —  and  such  parents  !  —  on  the  same  level  with 
a  Philistine  woman. 

Ver.   18.  Before  the  sun  went  down.     Here 

also  we  have  the  poetical  name  <~ID"in  (instead  of 

the  form  DTJWi  for  the  sun,  cf.  on  ch.  viii.  13. 

Beautiful  is  the  expression  S12,  to  come,  for  "  to 
Bet."  The  sun  comes  home,  as  it  were  —  comes 
into  his  house,  like  a  bridegroom  after  his  wed- 
ding. On  the  other  hand,  when  the  sun  rises,  the 
Hebrew  says  that  he  "  goes  forth  "  into  activity, 
forth  for  victory  like  a  hero. 

Had  ye  not  "ploughed  with  my  heifer,  ye  had 
not  found  out  my  riddle.  The  answer  of  the 
angry  Samson  is  elegantly  couched  in  the  form  of 
a  proverb,  full  of  spirit,  as  are  all  his  sayings 
which  have  been  preserved.  It  starts  from  the 
experience  that   buried   treasures  come   to   light, 

ver.  17  :  "  she  wept  before  him  seven  days."  The  natural 
explanation  seems  to  be  this  :  As  soon  as  the  riddle  was 
given,  the  young  wife  at  once  began  to  teaze  for  its  solu- 
tion. Refusal  both  stimulated  her  curiosity  and  wounded 
her  vanity,  so  that  even  before  the  end  of  the  first  day  she 
had  recourse  to  the  argument  of  tears.  Day  by  day  she 
renewed  the  assault,  but  always  ineffectually.  Finally,  on 
the  seventh  day  she  brings  a  new  argument,  furnished  her 
by  the  guesto.  For  the  first  three  days  of  the  festivities 
these  had  sought  to  solve  the  riddle  in  a  legitimate  way. 
Such  appears  to  be  the  import  of  the  remark  in  ver.  14  : 
"  and  they  could  not  in  three  days  expound  the  riddle." 
tfh»t  they  did  on  the  next  three  days  is  not  stated.     They 


when  the  soil  is  turot/.  by  the  plough.  (Tages, 
the  Roman  Genius,  "rfks  fabled  to  have  been  thus 
ploughed  up.)  But  not  every  one  knows  where  to 
draw  the  furrow.  The  Philistines  would  not  have 
known  it ;  but  his  heifer  had  shown  them  the  way. 
The  comparison  is  not  very  flattering  to  the  trai- 
toress,  but  quite  appropriate.  For  no  merit  accrues 
to  the  heifer  when  it  ploughs  the  right  furrow  :  it 
has  been  shown  to  it.  So  also  the  woman  :  she 
has  solved  nothing,  but  only  played  the  traitor. 

Ver.  19.  And  he  went  down  to  Ashkelon,  and 
slew  thirty  men  of  them.  Why  to  Ashkelon  ? 
Against  the  people  of  Timnah  he  could  not  turn 
his  wrath.  He  had  eaten  with  them,  and  he  would 
not  withdraw  himself  from  the  obligations  he  had 
assumed.  But  their  conduct  had  awakened  him 
to  a  sense  of  the  great  national  contrast  between 
them  and  Israel.  At  this  moment  he  felt  that 
Israel  lay  in  the  bands  of  servitude.  Between  his 
people  and  the  Philistines  no  other  treaty  existed, 
than  that  wh'.ch  is  made  by  the  cowardly  and  the 
God-forsaken  with  their  enemies.  Israel  endured 
servitude,  because  it  had  fallen  away  from  its  an- 
cient spirit.     It  ventured  no  longer  on  resistance. 

All  this  came  home  to  Samson's  mind  at  this 
moment.  He  determined  to  give  a  proof  of  Israel- 
itish  strength.  Hence  we  read,  "  the  Spirit  of  Je- 
hovah came  upon  him,"  a  remark  always  found 
where  Israel  manifests  a  determination  to  lift  up 
heart  and  hand  against  the  enemies  of  God.  His 
relations  would  have  advised  him  to  collect  money 
and  buy  the  garments.  It  was  a  divine  inspiration 
which  moved  him  to  pay  by  battle.  Why  did  he 
go  to  Ashkelon  ?  Because  there  were  rich  and 
valiant  n.en  there,  whom  it  was  worth  while  to 
attack  and  overcome.  Probably  it  was  a  nuptial 
party,  graced,  as  his  own  had  been,  with  thirty 
attendant  groom's-men,  that  he  surprised.  It  was 
not  done  in  the  midst  of  peace.  There  was  no 
peace  between  Philistines  and  Israel.  He  con- 
quered the  thirty  Philistines  (members,  perhaps, 
as  we  have  said,  of  a  nuptial  train)  with  the  sword, 
as  he  vanquished  his  own  retinue  in  a  conflict  of 
intellect.  The  fame  of  the  wonderful  young  Is- 
raelite resounds  through  the  land.  No  reprisals 
are  made.  The  princes  of  the  Philistines  look  on 
the  occurrence  as  a  private  affair.  But  a  silent 
quaking  of  conscience,  such  as  seizes  on  tyrants 
when  a  fresh  spirit  stirs  itself  among  the  op- 
pressed, contributed  no  doubt  to  the  preservation 
of  repose. 

Took    their    attire,     Drn^bn.       Chalitsah 

(TT2>yr\)  is  the  military  equipment,  of  which  the 
fallen  are  stripped,  cf.  2  Sam.  ii.  21.  There,  the 
Sept.  renders  it  TravoirAia ;  here,  <tt6\ti.  This  sup- 
ports the  opinion  of  the  Targum,  adduced  above, 
that  the  promise  of  Samson  referred  to  military  gar- 
ments. For  the  chaliphoth  (changes  of  garments) 
which  he  paid,  were  doubtless  part  of  the  chalitsoth, 
or  military  suits,  which  he  took ;  so  that  Samson 

may  have  remained  inactive,  trusting  in  some  way  to  com- 
pass the  solution  at  last,  or  they  may  have  been  already 
ploughing  with  Samson's  heifer.  But  if  the  latter,  they 
had  not  yet  recourse  to  threats.  On  the  last  day  of  th« 
feast,  however,  when  they  find  that  waiting  has  been  as  in- 
effective as  working,  and  that  the  wife's  importunities  (of 
which  they  were  probably  cognizant,  even  though  they  did 
not  stimulate  them),  have  likewise  accomplished  nothing, 
they  resort  to  threats  against  the  wife.  The  latter  there- 
upon becomes  more  urgent  and  tearful  than  ever,  and  gainf 
her  point.  Compare  Bertheau  and  Kjil,  who  give  i 
tially  the  same  explanation.  —  Ta.] 


CHAPTER  XV.    1-8. 


SOS 


lid  not  first  sell  his  booty,  and  then  buy  new  gar- 
ments. It  is  in  harmony  with  the  dramatic  course 
di"  the  action,  that  Samson  flung  to  his  treacherous 
friends,  as  the  price  of  their  deception,  garments 
snatched  from  their  own  countrymen. 

And  he  went  up  to  his  father's  house.  His 
wrath  blazed  up  into  a  national  flame  against  the 
Philistine  brood.  He  turns  his  back  upon  them, 
and  goes  home.  It  seems  to  be  his  intention  never 
to  come  back.  How  little  they  were  worthy  of 
him,  is  shown  by  the  conduct  of  the  woman,  after 
his  departure.  That  she  may  not  be  without  a 
husband  in  consequence  of  her  treason,  she  is  re- 
warded with  the  hand  of  another  man.  One  of 
the  companions  for  whose  sake  she  deceived  Sam- 
8on,  marries  her.  To  treason  she  adds  infidelity. 
Meanness  of  disposition  gives  birth  to  everything 
that  is  bad.  It  can  neither  love  nor  be  faithful ; 
but  least  of  all  can  it  comprehend  a  man  such  as 
Samson  was. 

A  survey  of  only  that  which  chapter  xiv.  shows 
of  Samson,  should  have  excited  the  attention  of 
those  who  find  pleasure  in  comparing  him  with 
Hercules.  While  all  the  ancient  statements  about 
the  Greek  hero  have  value  only  as  the  vehicles 
of  mythico-symbolical  ideas,  Samson  appears  in 
the  midst  of  history,  wearing  the  living  hues  of 
actual  existence.  Hercules,  the  more  the  later 
Greeks  take  him  historically,  the  more  he  assumes 
the  character  of  a  coarse  giant  and  glutton,  who, 
averse  to  culture,  kills  his  master ;  while  Samson 
is  at  once  portrayed  as  a  genial  man,  of  noble  dis- 
position. It  were  more  feasible  to  institute  a  com- 
parison between  Samson  and  many  traits  in  the 
character  of  Ulysses,  were  it  not  that  in  the  latter, 
as  in  Greek  heroes  generally,  there  is  wanting  the 
pathos  of  the  national  champion,  and  that  eleva- 
tion of  spirit  which,  in  the  case  of  Samson,  breaks 
through  the  fetters  of  even  his  deepest  sensuality. 
It  is  already  a  misapprehension  when  some  would 
assign  twelve  exploits  to  Samson,  seeing  that  his 
whole  life  is  given  for  a  testimony;  but  when  his 
•laying  of  the  thirty  Philistines  is  counted  as  the 


second  (as  e.  g.  by  Bertheau),  there  is  a  want  of 
understanding  even  of  the  Heraclean  performances. 
These  are  a  didactic  poem ;  what  is  told  of  Sam 
son,  signifies  an  ethical  deed.  The  deeds  of  Her- 
cules have  no  mutual  connection  :  those  of  Samson, 
ethico-historical  in  their  nature,  are  conditioned 
one  by  the  other.  The  succeeding  history,  related 
in  chap,  xv.,  connects  itself  with  what  has  gone 
before. 

HOJHLETICAL  AND   PRACTICAL. 

[Henry  (on  vers.  10,  12) :  It  is  no  part  of  re- 
ligion to  go  contrary  to  the  innocent  usages  of  the 
places  where  we  live ;  nay,  it  is  a  reproach  to  relig 
ion,  when  those  who  profess  it  give  just  occasion 
to  others  to  call  them  covetous,  sneaking,  anj 
morose.  A  good  man  should  strive  to  make  him- 
self, in  the  best  sense,  a  good  companion.  —  The 
same  :  •'  If  ye  had  not  ploughed  with  my  heifer, 
you  had  not  found  out  my  riddle."  Satan,  in  his 
temptations,  could  not  do  us  the  mischief  he  does, 
if  he  did  not  plough  with  the  heifer  of  our  own 
corrupt  nature.  —  The  same  :  "  And  he  went  up 
to  his  father's  house."  It  were  well  for  us,  if  the 
unkindness  we  meet  with  from  the  world,  and  our 
disappointments  in  it,  had  but  this  good  effect  upon 
us  to  oblige  us  by  faith  and  prayer  to  return  to 
our  heavenly  Father's  house,  and  rest  there. — 
The  same  :  "  Samson's  wife  was  given  to  his  com- 
panion, whom  he  had  used  as  his  friend."  See 
how  little  confidence  is  to  be  put  in  man,  when 
those  may  prove  our  enemies  whom  we  have  used 
as  our  friends.  —  Bp.  Hall  (on  ver.  19):  If  we 
wonder  to  see  thirty  throats  cut  for  their  suits,  we 
may  easily  know  that  this  was  but  the  occasion 
of  that  slaughter  whereof  the  cause  was  their  op- 
pression and  tyranny. 

Wordsworth  :  At  the  marriage  feast  of  Cana 
in  Galilee,  Christ  manifested  forth  his  glory  (John 
ii.  11).  But  at  this  marriage  in  Timnath,  Samson 
betrayed  the  first  signs  of  moral  weakness  and 
degeneracy.  —  Tr.] 


Samson  returns  to  visit  his  wife.     Finding  that  she  has  been  given  to  another,  hi 
avenges  himself  on  the  Philistines  by  firing  their  standing  corn. 

Chapter  XV.  1-8. 


1  But  [And]  it  came  to  pass  within  a  while  after  [after  a  while],  in  the  time  of 
wheat-harvest,  that  Samson  visited  his  wife  with  a  kid  ;  and  he  said,  I  will  go  in 
to  my  wife  into  the  chamber  [the  female  apartment].     But  her  father  would  not  suffer 

2  him  to  go  in.  And  her  father  said,  I  verily  thought  that  thou  hadst  utterly  hated 
her  ;  therefore  I  gave  her  to  thy  companion  :  is  not  her  younger  sister  fairer  than 

3  she  ?  take  her  [be  she  thine],  I  pray  thee,  instead  of  her.  And  Samson  said  con- 
cerning [to]  them,  Now  shall  I  be  more  [omit:  more]  blameless  than  [before]  the 

4  Philistines,  though  I  do  them  a  displeasure  [do  them  evil].  And  Samson  went 
and  caught  three  hundred  foxes  [jackals],  and  took  fire-brands  [torches],  tnd  turned 

5  tail  to  tail,  and  put  a  fire-brand  [torch]  in  the  midst  between  two  tails.  And  when 
he  had  set  the  brands  [torches]  on  fire,  he  let  them  go  [sent  them  off  —  i. «.,  the  ani- 
mals] into  the  standing  corn  of  the  Philistines,  and  burnt  up  both  the  shocks,  and 
also  the  standing  corn,  with  the  vineyards  and  olives  [with  the  olive-gardens] 

*  Then  the  Philistines  said,  Who  hath  done  this?     And  they  answered,  Samson,  the 


204 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


son-in  law  of  the  Timnite,  because  he  had  taken  [took]  his  wife,  and  given  [gave] 
her  to  his  companion.     And  the  Philistines  came  up,  and  burnt  her  and  her  father 

7  with  fire.     And  Samson  said  unto  them.  Though  ye  have  done  this  [If  ve  act  thus], 

8  yet  will  I  [(I  swear)  that  I  will]  be  avenged  of  you,  and  after  that  I  will  cease.  And 
he  smote  them  hip  [shank]  and  thigh  with  a  great  slaughter.  And  he  went  :h>\\n 
and  dwelt  in  the  top  [cleft]  of  the  rock  Etam. 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  1,  2.  And  it  came  to  pass  after  some 
time.  Samson's  disposition  was  too  noble  to  cher- 
ish anger  long:  only  small  souls  hear  gradge9. 
But  great  natures  measure  others  by  themselves. 
Because  they  have  forgotten  the  wrong  that  was 
done  them,  they  think  that  others  are  no  longer 
mindful  of  the  wrong  they  have  done.  Samson 
feels  as  if  nothing  had  happened.  Kindly-disposed 
as  ever,  he  comes  to  visit  his  wife.  His  conciliatory 
feeling  declares  itself  in  the  present  of  a  kid  which 
he  brings.  His  wife,  it  says,  has  nothing  to  fear. 
Conscious  of  harmless   intentions,   he  wishes   to 

enter  her  room  ("^710  's  f°r  the  most  part  the 
inner  apartment,  where  the  women  sleep).  But 
this  leads  to  the  disclosure  of  how  he  has  been 
treated.  Her  father  does  not  allow  him  to  enter, 
on  the  ground  that  she  is  no  longer  his  wife,  but 
another's.  The  injustice  of  the  transaction  thus 
disclosed  was  patent.  For  Samson's  absence  can- 
not have  been  long.  He  returned  in  the  season 
of  the  wheat-harvest  (mentioned  on  account  of 
ver.  5),  which  fell  perhaps  in  May.  It  is  probable 
that  in  Palestine,  as  elsewhere,  most  weddings  took 
place  in  the  spring.  Samson,  at  his  departure, 
had  not  said  that  he  would  not  return.  His  father- 
in-law  excuses  himself  only  by  intimating  that  he 
thought  he  would  not  come  back.  The  words  of 
ver.  2  enable  us  almost  to  see  the  anxiety  and  fear 
with  which  the  father  seeks  to  exculpate  himself 
before  Samson,  —  whom  he  now  knows  better  than 
formerly,  —  and  under  the  influence  of  which  he 
offers  him  his  other  daughter  as  indemnification. 
He  cannot  restore  his  wife  for  fear  of  the  Philis- 
tines ;  and  he  fears  him  because  of  the  injustice  he 
lias  done  him. 

Ver.  3.  And  Samson  said  to  them  :  This  time 
I  shall  be  blameless,  etc.  The  greatness  of  his 
nature  shows  itself  here  also.  To  the  fearful  father 
he  does  no  harm.  Small  heroism  there  would 
have  been  in  that.  He  uses  no  violence  —  brings 
the  man  into  no  awkward  relations  with  his  coun- 
trymen. He  remembers  that  his  daughter  has 
been  his  wife,  love  of  whom  has  brought  him 
there.  Besides  —  and  this  again  manifests  the 
warrior  of  God  in  him  —  he  speedily  sinks  all  per- 
sonal interests  in  the  general  interests  of  his  peo- 
ple. At  every  conflict  the  consciousness  of  his 
divine  vocation  breaks  forth.  He  turns  his  per- 
sonal wrong  into  an  occasion  of  a  national  exploit 
against  the  enemy  of  his  people  as  a  whole.  The 
siL'n  of  consecration  is  upon  his  head  in  order  to 
lead  him  on  from  small  things  to  great,  fbm 
things  personal  to  those  that  are  general,  from 
objects  of  sense  to  things  of  the  spirit,  and  to  re- 
mind him  of  his  call  to  be  a  hero  for  Israel  against 
the  Philistines. 


He  said  to  them.  To  whom?  To  his  own 
people  —  to  bis  own  family.  Israel  was  utterly 
dispirited.  The  people  did  not  feel  deenly  enough 
the  disgrace  in  which  they  lived.  Special  grounds 
were  wanting,  in  their  view,  to  justify  Samson's 
hostility  against  the  Philistines.  The  Philistines 
were  not  harming  them ;  why  then  attack  them  • 
Probably  Samson's  former  exploit  had  been  dis 
approved.  He  himself,  they  may  have  told  him, 
had  been  to  blame  in  the  riddle-matter.  None 
more  law-abiding  and  careful  than  a  slavish  peo- 
ple that  will  make  no  sacrifices.  Now,  says  Sam- 
son to  them,  have  you  still  nothing  to  say  ?  1 
have  a  cause  ;  I  have  been  undeniably  wronged. 
It  was  the  Philistines  who  forced  my  wife  and  her 
father  to  take  the  step  they  took.  They  did  it 
because  I  am  an  Israelite.  For  what  I  now  do 
against  them  I  am  not  to  be  blamed.  He  thus 
takes  advantage  of  the  letter  of  personal  rights  in 
behalf  of  the  spirit  of  general  freedom.  Since  his 
people  are  insensible  of  their  bondage,  he  makes 
his  private  affair  the  basis  of  a  declaration  of  war. 

Ver.  4.  And  he  caught  three  hundred  shu- 
alim  (jackals,  foxes).  Samson  found  himself  alone 
in  his  hostility  against  the  Philistines.  No  one  of 
his  father's  house  followed  him.  He  had  not  even 
three  hundred  men,  like  those  that  stood  by  Gid- 
eon. He  turns,  therefore,  to  the  beasts  of  the 
forest  for  confederates.  As  bears  come  to  the  help 
of  Elisha.  so  he,  instead  of  three  hundred  soldiers, 
procures  three  hundred  jackals,1  and  constitutes 
them  his  army  against  the  national  foe.  It  was 
an  ancient  and  common  war  measure,  still  em- 
ployed by  the  hostile  tribes  of  the  East,  to  set  fire 
to  the  standing  grain.  The  Lydian  king  Alyattes 
used  this  terrible  means  for  twelve  successive  years 
against  the  Milesians  (Herod,  i.  17-19).  It  was 
the  most  telling  damage  that  Samson  could  inflict 
on  the  Philistines.  They  had  not  stirred  when 
he  slew  the  thirty  men.  The  living  received  no 
injury  from  that.  But  when  the  harvest  disap- 
pears in  flames,  the  calamity  is  felt  far  and  wide. 
For  this  reason,  Samson  could  not  execute  his 
work  alone.  The  fire  would  have  been  more 
quickly  perceived  and  more  readily  quenched ;  for 
he  could  begin  only  in  one  spot.  He  chose  this 
measure,  not  only  to  show  his  strength  and  his 
warlike  humor,  but  also  to  let  the  enemy  see  how 
much  he  was  to  be  feared,  albeit  he  stood  alone. 
True  it  is,  undoubtedly,  that  no  other  man  would 
have  found  it  an  easy  matter  thus  to  catch  and  use 
three  hundred  jackals.2  But  what  a  fearful,  run- 
ning,3 and  illimitable  conflagration  arose,  when  the 
three  hundred  animals,  almost  crazed  by  the  burning 
torches  that  wrapped  their  tails  in  fire,  sped  through 
the  standing  grain  to  seek  deliverance  and  freedom 
for  themselves  and  —  so  to  speak  —  for  Samson. 
The  tire  not  only  spread  of  itself,  but  was  carried 


1  It  may  be  mentioned  as  an  exegetical  curiosity  that    of  the  jackals.     It  was  finally  concluded  that  a  good  paij 
earlier  interpreters  sought  to  explain  the  word  shualim  of    of  mittens  had  rendered  useful  service.     Oedmann,  Verm 


wUps  of  straw.     Cf.  Stark,  Observ.    Select.  (Lips.  1714)  p 
127. 

2  A  great  deal  of  debate  was  formerly  had  on  the  ques- 
tion of  the  greater  or  less  difficulty  involved  in  the  capture 


Samml.,  ii.  32. 

8  The  Greek  name  of  the  jackal,  0iis,  iB  derived  from  $609, 
nimble,  swift,  since  they  run  very  fast,  raster  than  wolrefl 
Benfey  holds  a  different  opinion  ( Gram.  ii.  276). 


CHAPTER  XV.   1-8. 


20£ 


by  the  pain-maddened  animals  ever  deeper  into 
the  possessions  of  the  Philistines.  Three  hundred 
burning  torches  ran,  with  the  swiftness  of  the 
wind,  in  the  dry  season,  through  the  waving  fields, 
past  the  shocks,  and  up  the  mountain  vine-yards,1 
with  which  at  all  times  the  fox  is  too  well  ac- 
quainted for  the  interests  of  the  owner.  In  this 
blow  Samson,  ever  ingenious,  translated  a  widely 
diffused  popular  figure  into  terrible  reality.     The 

word  71,!lt£?  is  the  general  term  for  that  class  of 
animals  of  which  the  cam's  aureus,  alopex,  and  cam's 
vulpes  are  the  species.  It  is  thought  that  we  must 
here  think  of  the  cants  aureus,  the  jackal,  inas- 
much as  this  animal  is  found  in  those  regions  in 
large  troops.  All  we  can  be  certain  of,  is,  that  a 
member  of  the  red  fox  family  is  intended,  whose 
tail  itself  looks  like  a  red  burning  torch  or  glow- 
ing coal.2  For  Grimm's  remark  (made  in  the  year 
1812,  d.  Museum,  p.  393),  that  in  the  narrative  of 
Reynard  "  the  tail  and  its  red  color  are  indispensa- 
ble," is  indeed  true.  "  The  witnesses  of  foxes  are 
their  tails,"  is  an  old  Arabic  proverb  (Diez,  Denk- 
wurd.  v.  Asien,  ii.  88).  The  Greeks,  for  this  rea- 
son, called  the  fox  Xa/xvovpis,  bright,  burning  tail. 
Expositors  have  frequently  directed  attention  to 
the  statements  of  Ovid  (fast.  iv.  681)  concerning 
an  ancient  Roman  custom,  practiced  in  Carseoli, 
at  the  festival  of  the  Cerealia,  of  letting  go  foxes, 
with  burning  torches  tied  to  them,  by  means  of 
which  they  were  consumed.  The  idea  of  the  cere- 
mony was  undoubtedly  to  present  the  fox,  who, 
according  to  the  story,  once  set  the  grain-fields  on 
fire,  as  a  propitiatory  offering  to  ward  off  mildew,3 
of  which  he  is  a  type.  The  mildew  is  called  robigoi 
in  Latin,  Greek  ipucrl&ri;  both  to  be  derived  from 
the  reddish  color  of  the  affection  (Preller,  RSm. 
Myth.  p.  437).  This  is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that 
hafiirovpls  was  also  the  name  for  the  glow  worm. 
The  Boeotians  were  not  the  only  ones  who,  as 
Suidas  mentions  (cf.  Bochart,  lib.  iii.  xxii.),  be- 
lieved that  fire  could  be  kindled  with  the  glow- 
worm ;  in  Germany  also  tradition  related  that 
glow-worms  carried  coals  into  buildings  (Wolf, 
Deutsche  Muthologie,  i.  233),  just  as  by  a  similar 
figure  the  phrase,  "  to  set  the  red  cock  on  the  roof" 
(den  rothen  Hahn  auf's  Dach  setzen),  was  used  to 
denote  incendiarism. 

It  was  a  fearful  reality  into  which  the  idea  of 
the  incendiary  fox  was  converted  by  Samson.5 
The  Philistines  were  terrified. 

Ver.  6.  And  the  Philistines  said,  Who  hath 
done  this  ?  They  are  informed  of  the  author  and 
the  occasion  of  his  wrath.  They  determine  to 
avenge  themselves,  hut  choose  a  mode  as  cowardly 
as  it  was  unjust.  As  in  the  former  instance  they 
left  Samson's  deed  unpunished,  so  now  they  wiil 
have  nothing  to  do  with  him.  It  would  be  impos- 
sible to  show  more  delicately  how  tyrannous  power 
becomes  conciliatory  and  circumspect  towards  de- 

1  [Dr.  Cassel  renders  H^T  D"^3  (ver.  6)  by  "  vine- 
yards." It  ia  difficult  to  account  for  this,  except  upon  the 
supposition  of  inadvertence.  C™^3  is  in  the  construct 
itate,  and  is  used  here  in  its  general  sense  of  garden,  plan- 
tation— Tr.] 

2  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  the  Persian  for  jackal 
(stiagh-tl)  occurs  also  with  the  sense  of  carbo  and  pntna,  glow- 
big  coal  (cf.  Vullers,  Pers.  Lex.,  ii.  433,  438),  and  that  the 
Old  High  German  cholo,  a  coal,  seems  to  be  the  same  word. 
Hence  the  terms  Brandfuchs,  Kohlenfuths,  renard  char- 
5onier,  volpe  carbonaja. 

8  [The  German  word  is  kirnbrand,  fp  corn-burn."  —  Tr.] 
*  From  rufus.     Cognate  names  for  the  fox  are  found  in 


pendents,  as  soon  as  a  man  of  spirit  appears  among 
them.  Instead  of  risking  anything  against  him, 
they  commit  an  outrage  on  the  weak  In  order  to 
pacify  him.  They  tall  upon  the  family  of  the  wife 
of  Samson,  and  hum  father  and  daughter  in  their 
house.  It  was  a  sad  fate.  It  was  to  avert  the 
very  same  danger  that  the  woman  had  betrayed 
Samson.  It  was  on  account  of  the  Philistines-  tha' 
she  was  separated  from  him.  And  now  these  exe 
cute  the  cruel  deed  in  order  to  pacify  Samson's 
hostility.  Such  is  the  curse  of  treason.  But  the 
instruments  of  this  fate  were  still  more  guilty  than 
its  victims.  For  did  they  not  know  that  it  was 
against  themselves  that  Samson  had  directed  his 
national  vengeance?  Had  he  been  desirous  of 
personal  vengeance  on  his  wife's  family,  could  he 
not  have  inflicted  it  himself  as  well  as  they  1  IS 
they  intended  to  punish  the  recreant  family  for 
having  deprived  Samson  of  his  wife,  they  certainly 
could  not  expect  thereby  to  inflict  pain  on  Sam- 
son ?  What  a  difference  between  them  and  him ! 
The  injured  hero  turns  his  vengeance  against  the 
powerful;  and  these  take  satisfaction  on  the  weak 
He  elevates  a  personal  conflict  into  a  national 
challenge,  which  they  lower  into  vengeance  on  in- 
dividuals. He  spares  the  house  of  the  Timnite, 
although  Philistines  :  they  murder  it,  from  cow- 
ardly circumspection,  although  it  is  the  house  of  a 
countryman.  He  burns  their  fields  in  order  to 
rouse  them  to  battle,  and  they  burn  their  brethren 
in  order  to  pacify  the  enemy. 

Ver.  7.  And  Samson  said  to  them,  If  ye  act 
thus.  This  cruel  cowardice  awakens  Samson's 
utmost  contempt  and  resentment.  They  seek  to 
conciliate,  but  only  provoke.  They  judge  the  hero 
by  themselves  when  they  think  to  have  quieted 
him  by  such  an  abomination  ;  and  he  smites  them 
according  to  their  deserts.  The  loss  which  he  had 
suffered  was  not  great ;  but  what  the  Philistines 
do,  becomes  to  them,  through  his  action,  a  source 
of  misery.  The  words,  "  if  ye  act  thus,"  express 
the  full  measure  of  his  contempt.  In  ver.  3  he 
only  spoke  of  "doing  them  evil"  (damage);  but 
now  he  says,  I  will  not  cease  until  "I  have  taken 

satisfaction  on  yourselves  "  (E?^)-  The  cowardly 
Philistines  afforded  him  an  occasion  for  wrath  and 
victory  such  as  he  had  not  hitherto  possessed.  For 
he  must  take  advantage  of  such  opportunities,  on 
account  of  the  torpor  of  his  own  people.  He  must 
estimate  the  loss  of  a  faithless  wife  and  a  charac- 
terless Philistine  father-in-law  sufficiently  high,  in 
order  to  give  free  course  to  the  national  wrath 
against  the  pusillanimous  foe. 

Ver.  8.  And  he  smote  them,  shank  and  thigh, 
with  a  great  slaughter.  What  Philistines  he 
smote  is  not  stated;  but  it  is  to  be  supposed  that 
he  surprised  those  who  burned  the  Timnite.  These 
he  attacked,  man  by  man ;  and  inflicted  a  "  great 

defeat."     For  the  words  rVVTi  HS'J  are  explan- 

various  dialects :  Spanish,  raposo ;  Portuguese,  rapoxo  , 
Danish,  raev :  Swedish,  rdf ;  in  the  Finnish  tongues,  repe, 
rebbane  (cf.  Pott,  Etym.  Forsrh.,  i.  lxxxii.). 

6  Speaking  of  Hannibal's  6tratagem  of  fastening  fire- 
brands to  the  horns  of  two  thousand  cattle,  Livy  (xxii.  17) 
says :  (t  Hawi  secus,  quam  silvis  montibusque  a-censis,  om- 
nia circum  virzulta  ardtre." —  The  instance  of  the  burning 
fox-tails  from  Roman  customs,  is  remarkably  paralleled  by  l 
Persian  superstition.  Whenever  from  want  of  rain  the 
grain  threatened  to  burn  up,  it  was  the  practice  to  fasten 
combustible  materials  to  tbe  tail  of  a  young  bullock,  and 
set  them  ou  fire.  If  the  bullock  thus  treated  ran  over  I 
hill,  it  was  regarded  a  favorable  sign.  Cf.  Kichardson 
Abhandlungen  iiber  Spractten  etc.  nt^^enldndisckrr  VbUetr 
p.  236. 


206 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


atory  of  the  proverbial  expression  "i]~}^~  '¥  P'itP, 

"shank  and  thigh."  In  the  pltt1 — the  word  is 
manifestly  the  same  as  the  German  Schinke,  Schen- 
kel,  English,  "shank" — the  Hebrew  saw  a  sen- 
sible representation  of  the  strength  of  the  body. 
"God,"  says  the  Psalmist  (Vs.  cxlvii.  10),  "takes 

no  pleasure  in  the  "'P.ltS  of  a  man."  When  ori- 
ental narrators  wish  to  indicate  a  close  battle-array, 
they  say:  "shank  stood  on  shank"  (cf.  Diez, 
Denkw.  von  Asien,  i.  133).  Both  Romans  and 
Greeks  employed  forms  of  expression  which  imply 
that  to  break  a  person's  loin,  hip,  and  shank  to 
pieces  is  equivalent  to  hewing  him  down  com- 
pletely (cf.  infringere  lumbos,  percutere  femur,  [lupous 
iraraaaetv).  The  shank  is  underneath  the  thigh. 
The  proverbial  phrase  is  therefore  equivalent  to : 
"  he  smote  them  upper  leg  and  lower  leg,"  i.  e. 
completely ;  and  the  completeness  of  the  defeat  is 
yet  more  vividly  expressed  in  that  the  writer  says, 

"iT-!^-1^!?  pitt?    (literally,  "shank  upon   thigh"), 

whereas  the  natural  order  is  pltt?"  «■?  ?["£("  thigh 
upon  shank  ").  He  turned  them  upside  down,  and 
cut  them  to  pieces.  Bertheau's  endeavor  to  ex- 
plain the  words  by  the  Arabic  expression,  "  he 
smote  them  shank-fashion,"  is  not  satisfactory, 
6ince  this  phrase  seems  rather  to  denote  a  man  to 
man  conflict.  The  explanation,  "horseman  and 
footman,"  given  by  the  Targum,  is  worthy  of 
notice,  by  reason  of  the  knowledge  of  oriental 
languages  which  its  authors  may  be  supposed  to 
have  had.  Marvelous  are  the  explanations  of 
many  of  the  church  fathers  and  elder  expositors 
(cf.  Serarius,  in  toe.).  The  LXX.  translate  ver- 
bally :  Kf-fju^v  4t'i  pnp6v ;  but  only  kvt][*.ti  Kai  fiijp6s 
is  found  in  Greek  authors  (Plato,  Timceus,  74  ej. 

And  he  went  down  and  dwelt  in  the  cleft 
of  the  rock  Etam.  After  such  a  deed  he  deemed 
himself  no  longer  safe  in  Zorah  and  its  vicinity. 
He  looked  now  for  a  determined  attack  from  the 
enemy,  and  sought  therefore  a  secure  place  for  de- 
fense and  refuge.  He  found  it  in  a  "  cleft  of  the 
rock  Etam."  Opinions  differ  widely  as  to  the 
position  of  this  locality.  Bertheau  rinds  it  in  an 
Etam  near  Bethlehem  (the  Urtas  of  Robinson, 
Bibl.  Res.  i.  477),  which  seems  to  be  too  far  east, 
while  Keil  looks  for  it  too  far  south,  in  the  vicinity 
of  Khuweilifeh.  Samson  cannot  have  intended 
to  withdraw  altogether  from  further  conflicts,  his 
declaration,  "  after  that  I  will  cease,"  notwith- 
standing ;  for  this  referred  only  to  his  recompense 
of  the  abominable  deed  at  Timnah.  Nor  can  he 
have  removed  to   too   great  a  distance  from  his 


home.  Etam  is  a  name  which,  from  its  significa- 
tion, might  naturally  be  of  frequent  occurrence, 
and  which  is  very  suitable  for  the  abode  of  the  lion- 
slayer  and  jackal-conqueror.  It  signifies  "  wild- 
beasts'  lair  j "  for  t2?3?  is  a  ravenous  beast.  The 
name,  which  probably  still  answered  to  the  reality, 
offered  a  guaranty  for  the  sustenance  of  the  hero 
who  took  up  his  dwelling  there.  From  Deir  Dub-  . 
ban  to  Beit  Jibrin  (Eleutheropolis)  there  are  found 
remarkable  rock-caverns,  which  in  later  times  be- 
came places  of  refuge  for  Christians,  and  which 
even  in  very  ancient  times  doubtless  served  as  asy- 
lums for  warriors  and  wild  beasts.  Their  position 
is  such  that  for  Samson  it  could  not  have  been 
better  (cf.  Ritter,  xvi.  136,  etc.).  In  the  name 
Deir  Dubban —  dub,  dob,  is  a  bear — a  reminis 
cense  of  that  of  Etam  might  still  be  found.1 


HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

[Henky:  "  Visited  her  with  a  kid."  The  value 
of  the  present  was  inconsiderable,  but  it  was  in- 
tended as  a  token  of  a  reconciliation It  was 

generous  in  Samson,  as  the  party  offended,  and 
the  superior  relation,  to  whom  therefore  she  was 
bound  to  make  the  first  motion  of  reconciliation. 
When  differences  happen  between  near  relations, 
let  those  be  ever  reckoned  the  wisest  and  the  best, 
that  are  most  forward  to  forgive  and  forget  inju- 
ries, and  most  willing  to  stoop  and  yield  for  peace 
sake.  —  The  same  :  "  I  verily  thought  thou  hadst 
utterly  hated  her."  It  will  never  bear  us  out  in 
doing  ill,  to  say,  We  thought  others  designed  ill. — 
The  same  (on  ver.  6) :  See  His  hand  in  it  to 
whom  vengeance  belongs !  Those  that  deal  treach- 
erously, shall  be  spoiled  and  dealt  treacherously 
with,  and  the  Lord  is  known  by  these  judgments 
which  He  executes  ;  especially  when,  as  here,  He 
makes  use  of  his  people's  enemies  as  instruments  for 
revenging  his  people's  quarrels  one  upon  another. 
—  Bp.  Hall  :  If  the  wife  of  Samson  had  not  feared 
the  tire  for  herself  and  her  father's  house,  she  had 

not  betrayed  her  husband That  evil  which 

the  wicked  feared,  meets  them  in  their  flight.  How 
many,  in  a  fear  of  poverty,  seek  to  gain  uncon- 
scionably, and  die  beggars !  How  many,  to  shun 
pain  and  danger,  have  yielded  to  evil,  and  in  the 
long  run  have  been  met  in  the  teeth  with  that  mis- 
chief which  they  had  hoped  to  have  left  behind 
them  !  —  Tr.] 

1  Keil  (on  Josh.  xii.  15)  inclines  to  locate  the  Cave  of 
Adullam  at  Deir  Dubban. 


The  Philistines  threaten  war  against  Judah.      The  men  of  Judah,  to  save  themselves, 

seek  to  deliver  up  Samson,  who  allows  himself  to  be  bound,  but  tears  his  bonds 

when  brought  in  sight  of  the  Philistines,  and  slays  a  thousand  of  the  enemy. 

Chapter   XV.   9-20. 


9       Then   the  Philistines  went  up,  and  pitched  in  [encamped  against]  Judah,  and 

10  spread  themselves  in  Lehi.     And  the  men  of  Judah  said,  Why  are  ye  come  up 
against  us  ?     And  they  answered,  To  bind  [;.  <•.,  to  capture]  Samson  are  we  come  up,  to 

11  do  to  him  as  he  hath  done  to  us.     Then  three  thousand  men  of  Judah  went  [down] 


CHAPTER   XV.    9-20. 


2M 


to  the  top  [cleft]  of  the  rock  Etani,  and  said  to  Samson,  Knowest  thou  not  that 
the  Philistines  are  [omit:  are]  rulers  [rule]  over  us?  what  is  this  that  thou  hast 
done  unto  us  ?     And  he  said  unto  them,  As  they  did  unto  me,  so  have  I  done  unto 

12  them.  And  they  said  unto  him.  We  are  come  down  to  bind  thee,  that  we  may 
deliver  thee  into  the  hand  of  the  Philistines.     And  Samson  said  unto  them,  Swear 

13  unto  me,  that  ye  will  not  fall  upon  me  yourselves.  And  they  spake  unto  him,  say- 
ing, No ;  but  [for]  we  will  bind  thee  fast  [omit :  fast],  and  deliver  thee  into  their 
hand  :  but  surely  [omit :  surely]  we  will  not  kill  thee.     And  they  bound  him  with 

14  two  ne»  cords,  and  brought  him  up  from  the  rock.  And  when  he  came  unto  Lehi, 
the  Philistines  shouted  against1  him  :  and  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  came 
mightily  [suddenly]  upon  him,  and  the  cords  that  were  upon  his  arms  became  as 
flax  that  was  burnt  with  fire,  and  his  bands  loosed  [melted]  from  off  his  hands. 

15  And  he  found  a  new  [fresh]  jaw-bone  of  an  ass,  and  put  forth  his  hand,  and  took 

16  it,  and  slew  a  thousand  men  therewith.     And  Samson  said,2 

With  the  jaw-bone  of  an  ass 
A  mass,  yea  masses  : 
With  the  jaw-bone  of  an  ass 
I  slew  a  thousand  men. 

17  And  it  came  to  pass  when  he  had  made  an  end  of  speaking,  that  he  cast  away  the 
jaw-bone  out  of  his  hand,  and  [people]  called  that  place  Ramath-lehi  [Hill  of  the 

18  jaw-bone].  And  he  was  sore  athirst,  and  called  on  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  and  said, 
Thou  hast  given  this  great  deliverance  into  [by]  the  hand  of  thy  servant :  and  now 

19  shall  I  die  for  thirst,  and  fall  into  the  hand  of  the  uncircumcised  ?  But  [And] 
God  clave  an  hollow  place  [lit.  the  mortar]  that  was  in  the  jaw  [in  Lehi],3  and 
there  came  water  thereout ;  and  when  he  had  drunk,  [and  he  drank,  and]  his  spirit 
came  again,  and  he  revived.     Wherefore  he  [men]  called  the  name  thereof  En- 

20  hakkore  [Well  of  him  that  called],  which  is  in  Lehi  unto  this  day.  And  he  judged 
Israel  in  the  days  of  the  Philistines  twenty  years. 

TEXTUAL  AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  14.  —  inS^r     :   "towards,"  rather  than  "against."     The  idea  is  that  when  the  Philistines  saw  Samson 
t  :  • 
coming,  they  set  up  shouts  of  exultation  which  "  met  him,"  so  to  speak,  as  he  approached.  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  16.  —  We  place  the  amended  rendering  of  this  poetic  utterance  in  the  text,  and  for  convenience'  sake  subjoin 
here  that  of  the  E.  V. :  — 

With  the  jaw-hone  of  an  ass. 
Heaps  upon  heaps  ; 
"With  the  jaw  of  an  ass 
Have  I  slain  a  thousand  men. 

The  unusual  form  "T1DH  =  ""^n  (found  elsewhere,  if  at  all,  only  in  1  Sam.  xvi.  20).  is  manifestly  chosen  for  the  saJw 
of  a  pun.  It  means  a  ''  heap :  "  but  in  order  to  reproduce  the  paronomasia  as  nearly  as  possible,  we  have  substituted 
the  word  "mass.'"  as  suggested  by  Dr.  Wordsworth,  in  loc.  According  to  Keil,  the  expression,  "a  heap,  two  heaps,"  in- 
timates that  the  victory  was  accomplished,  not  in  one  combat,  but  in  several.  But  as  the  magnitude  of  the  victory  il 
evidently  celebrated,  rather  than  the  process  of  its  accomplishment,  the  dual  is  better  regarded  as  designed  to  amplify 
and  heighten  the  idea  of  the  preceding  singular  :  "  a  heap  —  yes,  a  pair  of  heaps  !  "  —  Tr.] 

[3  Ver.  19.  —  "Tl*  2.  The  article  occasions  no  difficulty,  as  it  is  frequently  used  with  proper  nouns,  especially  with 
names  of  places,  rivers,  etc.  ;  see  ties.  Gram.  109.  3.  and  especially  Ewald,  277  c.  Keil  very  properly  observes,  that  if  a  tooth- 
socket  in  the  ass's  jaw-bone  were  intended,  the  expression  would  naturally  be    NPlvrT    ti'nSQ  or   Tlv2    HV-12E 

rather  than  TIv2  ~^CTS  L^'j^pE.  Wordsworth,  speaking  of  the  opinion  that  God  clave  the  rock,  objects  "  that  tho 
words  are,  'God  clave  tht  mactesh,'  which  seems  much  more  applicable  to  the  mortar  of  the  jaw  than  to  a  place  in  the 
rock."  As  if  an  ass  had  but  one  tooth  to  a  jaw-bone!  Bush  is  probably  not  far  wrong  when  he  suggests  that  "a 
fondness  for  multiplying  miracles,"  may  have  had  some  influence  over  the  renderings  of  "several  of  the  ancient  v«r 
sions  "  at  this  place.  —  Tr.) 


EXEGET1CAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  9,  10.  And  the  Philistines  went  up  and 
encamped  against  Judah.  Samson  had  foreseen 
that  the  Philistines  would  now  seek  vengeance  on 
a  larger  scale,  and  had  therefore  provided  himself 
with  a  place  of  security  against  both  friend  and 
foe.  This  time  also,  however,  the  enemy  proceed 
not  directly  against  him,  but  take  the  field  against 
Israel.  As  on  a  former  occasion,  they  seek  satis- 
"action  from  those  who  were  really  innocent,  and 


who  would  gladly  remain  at  peace.  They  an 
nounce  that  they  have  come  to  bind  Samson,  i.  e., 
to  make  him  powerless  to  injure  them.  It  is  no 
sign  of  forbearance  that  they  do  not  say,  "  We  vill 
kill  him ; "  on  the  contrary,  it  appears  from  eh.  xvi. 
that  they  entertained  still  more  cruel  designs.  It 
was  easy  for  Judah  to  perceive  how  cowardly  was 
the  hatred  they  cherished  against  Samson,  and 
thence  to  infer  what  heroic  deeds  of  conquest  the 
victor  might  yet  achieve ;  but  the  great  tribe,  on?e 
so  powerful  in  action,  lay  helpless  in  the  deepest 


208 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


decay-  It  would  not  be  possible  to  portray  the 
slavish  disposition  of  a  people  that  has  departed 
from  God  more  strikingly,  than  is  here  done  by 
the  conduct  of  Judah. 

Ver.  1 1 .  Then  three  thousand  men  of  Judah 
went  down  to  the  cleft  of  the  rock  Etam.  Ju- 
dah never  enjoyed  such  an  opportunity  to  free 
itself  from  the  yoke  of  the  Philistines.  It  had  a 
leader  of  incomparable  strength  and  energy.  The 
enemy  had  been  smitten,  and  was  apprehensive  of 
further  defeats.  If  it  had  risen  now,  and,  ranged 
under  Samson,  undertaken  a  war  of  liberation  in 
God's  name,  where  was  the  station  that  the  Philis- 
tines could  have  continued  to  hold  1  The  heroic 
deeds  of  Joshua  and  Caleb  would  have  been  re- 
enacted.  The  power  of  the  Philistines  would  have 
been  broken,  perhaps  forever.  But  what  did  Ju- 
dah ?  Terrified  by  the  threatening  advance  of  the 
Philistines,  coming  to  seek  Samson,  it  has  not 
even  courage  to  say,  "  Go,  and  bind  him  your- 
selves." Three  thousand  armed  men  are  quickly 
got  together,  not  to  avail  themselves  of  Samson's 
leadership  against  the  enemy,  but  —  alas!  for  the 
cowards  —  to  act  as  the  enemy's  tools,  pledged  to 
deliver  the  nation's  hero  into  their  hands.  The 
Philistines,  with  malicious  cunning,  probably  de- 
manded this  as  the  price  of  peace.  Por  either 
Samson  refuses  to  follow  the  men  of  Judah,  and 
smites  them,  which  would  be  gain  to  the  Philis- 
tines, or  he  is  taken  and  brought  by  them,  in 
which  case  they  will  have  heaped  disgrace  on  both, 
and  filled  them  with  wrath  toward  each  other. 
And  in  fact  the  number  of  the  men  who  proceed 
to  Etam,  shows  that  they  feel  obliged,  if  need  be, 
to  use  violence. 

And  they  said  to  Samson,  Knowest  thou  not, 
etc.  No  lost  battle  presents  so  sad  a  picture  as  do 
these  three  thousand  armed  men,  with  their  com- 
plaint against  Samson  that  he  has  provoked  the 
Philistines,  and  their  question,  Knowest  thou  not 
that  they  rule  over  us  1  It  was  so  easy  to  say  to 
him  :  Up,  Samson  !  they  come  to  bind  thee ;  come 
thou  to  free  us  from  their  bonds.  But  they  cannot 
speak  thus.  Their  heart  is  lost  in  idolatry.  No 
one  can  raise  himself  to  freedom,  who  has  not  first 
repented  —  for  penitence  is  courage  against  self, 
and  confession  before  others  —  and  among  the  three 
thousand  there  are  no  three  hundred  who  have  not 
bowed  to  Baal.  Samson's  negotiation  with  them, 
although  comprised  in  a  few  sentences,  is  worthy 
of  admiration.  After  all,  he  had  really  fought 
only  for  them,  and  had  attacked  the  oppressor  of 
the  nation.  But  he  does  not  upbraid  them  with 
this.1  Since  they  have  not  comprehended  the  fact 
that  his  own  cause  was  the  cause  of  the  nation,  he 
lays  no  stress  on  this,  but  shows  them  his  personal 
right  to  engage  in  the  war  he  had  waged.  The 
justification  he  sets  up  was  such  that  they  could 
not  in  honor  turn  against  him.     For  he  says  :  — 

As  they  did  unto  me,  so  have  I  done  unto 
them.  Retaliation  was  a  primitive  oriental  right, 
still  sanctioned  by  the  Koran.2  To  this  right  the 
Philistines  had  appealed  in  ver.  10  :  "  We  will  do 
to  Samson  as  he  did  to  us."     The  men  of  Judah 

1  Milton  tightly  makes  Samson  say  :  — 

"  I,  on  th'  other  side, 
Vsed  no  ambition  to  commend  my  deeds." 
•2   Sura,  5,  f>3,  which  refers  to  Ex.  xxi.  24,  where,  how- 
ever, the  law  intends  to  limit  retaliation  by  determining  its 
measure.    Compare  the  narrative  in  Diez,  DenJcwurdigkeiten 
A>i"is,  ii.  179. 

y  The  following  translation  of  vera.  15-17,  from  a  Ger- 
man book  puolished  in  1705,  at  Halle,  may  serve  as  a 
ipeclmen  of  the  exegesis  which  sometimes  passed  current: 


do  not  undertake  to  decide  upon  the  right  of  cithei 
party.  They  desire  nothing  but  peace — with  the 
Philistines.  They  would  submit  to  them  at  any 
price.  Any  admission  of  Samson's  right  would 
have  obligated  them  to  stand  by  him.  The  fact  is 
they  came  to  serve  not  as  judges  but  as  tools  of 
the  Philistines.  Whosoever  is  weak  enough  to  ac- 
cept such  a  mission,  will  not  be  brought  to  thought 
and  reason  by  any  exposition  of  right.  Idolatry 
is  ever  blindness.  Reason  had  evanished  from  the 
tribe.  How  else  could  it  surrender  such  a  man,  or 
hope  for  peace  from  the  Philistines  after  the  here 
whom  they  feared  was  in  their  possession  "!  How 
can  such  slaves  — in  recent  times  also  such  conduct 
as  theirs  has  been  called  peace-loving — expect  to 
remain  at  peace  ? 

Vers.  12,  13.  We  are  come  to  bind  thee,  said 
the  three  thousand  to  the  one  courageous  man. 
And  never  does  Samson  show  himself  greater  than 
when  he  voluntarily  allows  himself  to  be  bound- 
Against  his  countrymen  he  is  powerless.  With 
the  blood  of  Israel  he  must  not  and  will  not  stain 
himself.  He  makes  but  one  condition,  and  that 
the  least  possible.  No  Judaean  hands  must  medi- 
tate his  death.  That  condition  alone  would  have 
sufficed  to  inform  the  men  of  Judah,  had  they  been 
able  to  comprehend  such  heroism  at  all,  that  he 
consults  only  their  feelings,  because  they  are  Israel- 
ites, but  does  not  fear  the  Philistines. 

Ver.  14.  When  he  came  unto  Lehi,  the  shouts 
of  the  Philistines  met  him.  What  a  spectacle ! 
That  cowardice  can  brazen  hearts  and  faces  until 
all  sense  of  shame  is  lost,  is  shown  by  the  memor- 
able scene  here  depicted.  Judah  is  not  ashamed 
to  drag  its  hero  forward,  bound  with  strong  cords. 
It  does  not  blush  when  the  Philistines  shout  aloud 
at  the  spectacle.  But  this  cowardly  jubilation  was 
soon  to  be  turned  into  groans  and  Sight.  As  the 
hero  comes  in  sight  of  the  enemy  and  hears  their 
outcries,  the  Spirit  of  God  comes  upon  him.  His 
heart  boils  with  indignation  over  the  ignominy 
of  his  people.  His  strength  kindles  for  resistless 
deeds.  His  cords  fall  off  like  tow  seized  by  the 
fire.     He  is  free,  and  his  freedom  is  victory. 

Ver9.  15,  16.  And  he  saw  a  fresh  jaw-bone  of 
an  ass.  The  enemy  is  before  him  :  therefore,  for- 
ward !  to  battle  !  Any  weapon  is  welcome.  The 
jaw-bone  of  a  recently  fallen  ass  is  at  hand,  not 
yet  dried  up,  and  therefore  less  easily  broken.3 
Before  the  enemy  can  think,  perhaps  before  their 
shouts  over  the  prisoner  have  ceased,  he  is  free, 
armed,  and  dealing  out  deadly  blows.  The  panic 
is  as  great  as  the  triumph  had  been.  There  was 
nothing  but  flight  and  death  for  the  wretched  foe. 
There  ensued  a  slaughter  and  victory  so  extraor- 
dinary, that  Samson  himself,  in  poetic  ecstasy,  cries 
out:  — 

With  the  jaw-bone  of  an  ass 

I  slew  two  armies : 

With  the  jaw-bone  of  an  ass 

1  took  vengeance  on  a  thousand. 

For  in  the  clause  c;rnbq  TtaQ  ni^nn  ^nba 

the  paronomasia  is  to  be  noted  between  "VlEn,  an 

"Samson  found  a  troop  of  lively  soldiers,  stretched  forth 
his  hand  and  commanded  them,  and  led  theni  against  the 
Philistines And  when  he  had  thus  spoken,  he  dis- 
missed the  troops."  Against  such  insipidity  protests  arose 
at  that  time  from  all  sides  (cf.  Starke,  Not.  Select.,  p.  127), 
from  Gebhardi  (Dc  Maxilla  Simsonis,  1707)  in  Greifswald, 
Sidelmann  (De  Maxilla,  etc.,  1706)  in  Copenhagen,  and  in  a 
little-known,  but  thorough  refutation  by  Heine,  of  Berlin 
(I>issert.  Sacra,  p.  245). 


CHAPTER   XV.  9-20. 


20C 


us.  and  "IDDi  a  heap,  which  latter  is  here  poet- 
'cally  used  of  an  "  army." 

German  tradition  relates  a  similar  deed  of  Walter 
of  Aquitania.  His  enemies  pursue  him  in  the 
forest,  while  he  and  Hildegunde  roast  and  eat  a 
swine's  back.  He  seizes  the  swine's  bone,  and 
throws  it  against  the  enemy  with  such  violence 
that  the  latter  loses  his  eye  (  Wilkinasage,  trans- 
lated bv  Hagen,  i.  289,  ch.  lxxxvii.).  In  the  Latin 
poem  Waltarius,  the  hero  tears  out  the  shoulder- 
blade  of  a  calf,  and  with  it  slays  the  robbers 
(Grimm  and  Schmeller,  Lateinsche  Gedichte  des 
Mittelalters,  p.  109  f.).  In  both  versions  the  fiction 
is  unreasonable  and  tasteless,  whereas  the  history 
of  Samson  is  full  of  dramatic  power  and  spirit.  — 
The  mystical  sect  of  the  Nasairians,  in  Syria,  are 
said  to  venerate  the  jaw-bone  of  an  ass,  because 
an  ass  devoured  the  plant  on  which  the  original 
documents  of  their  religion  had  been  written  (cf. 
Ritter,  xvii.  97,  6). 

Ver.  17.  The  name  of  the  place  was  called 
Kamath-lechi  (Hill  of  the  Jaw-bone).  To  the 
height  upon  which  Samson  threw  the  jaw-bone, 
the  tradition  of  an  admiring  people  gave  and  pre- 
served a  name  commemorative  of  that  circum- 
stance. The  narrative  evinces  artistic  delicacy  in 
that  it  relates  that  Samson  uttered  his  poetic  words 
while  he  was  still  victoriously  swinging  the  un- 
usual weapon  in  his  hand.  The  humiliation  of 
the  Philistines,  formerly  smitten  by  means  of  foxes, 
and  now  with  the  jaw-bone  of  an  ass,  was  too  deep 
to  allow  the  historical  recollection  of  it  to  perish. 
To  seek  another  explanation  of  the  name  is  quite 
unnecessary.  It  is  undoubtedly  true  that  moun- 
tainous peaks  sometimes  derive  names  from  their 
forms,  as,  for  instance,  "  Ass'-ears  "  (on  the  coast 
of  Aden,  cf.  Ritter,  xii.  675),  or  "  Tooth"  (1  Sam. 
xiv.  4),  or  "Throat,"  "Nose,"  and  "Horn"  (cf. 
my  Thtir.  Ortsnamen,  ii.  p.  47,  n.  304)  ;  but  the 
possibility  of  an  historical  explanation  is  not 
thereby  diminished  :  tor  although  peculiar  names 
have  sometimes  given  rise  to  historical  legends, 
the  above  instances  show  that  quite  as  often  this  is 
not  the  case.  Lehi  (properly,  Lechi),  as  the  name 
of  a  locality,  does  not  elsewhere  occur ; '  and  a 
criticism  which  would  make  it  the  source  of  a  his- 
tory in  which  it  has  but  an  incidental  significance, 
and  which  forms  an  organic  part  of  the  history  of 
Samson  as  a  whole,  has  lost  all  claim  to  be  called 
criticism. 

Ver.  18.  And  he  was  sore  athirst,  and  called 
unto  Jehovah.  The  exertion  of  the  day  was  too 
great.  The  burning  sun  and  the  unusual  excite- 
ment also  contributed  their  part  to  exhaust  the 
powerful  man.  But  where  was  there  any  refresh- 
ment 1  He  was  alone,  as  always.  The  cowardly 
men  of  Judah  bad  taken  themselves  off,  in  order 
not  to  be  held  responsible  by  the  Philistines  on  the 
ground  of  participation  in  the  conflict.  Against 
the  enemy  he  had  that  mediate  divine  help  which 
came  to  him  through  his  Nazaritic  consecration ; 
but  this  was  no  protection  against  thirst.  He 
turns,  therefore,  to  God  in  prayer  for  direct  deliv- 
erance. 

1  In  2  Sam.  xxiii.  11,  where  some  are  disposed  to  find  it 

In  the  form  HTl  J  [by  reading  HTl    ,  i-  '-,   Tib  with 
t  -  -  t  :  iv*  -  : 

i"T    local,  cf.  Thenius,  in  lot.,  and  Fiirst,  Lex.  8.  w.  nsH 

and   TT7].  the   7  is  manifestly  the  prefix  preposition,  as 
appears  from  ver.  13.     The  Targum,  it  is  true,  distinguished 
tatween  tba  two  forms,  and  rendered  the  first  by  i"Vsn  •, 
14 


Thou  hast  given  this  great  salvation  by  the 
hand  of  thy  servant.  These  words  illustrate  and 
confirm  the  view  we  have  thus  far  sought  to  de- 
velop of  Samson's  spiritual  life.  In  his  hours  of 
lofty  elevation  of  soul,  when  the  Spirit  of  God 
impels  him  to  great  deeds  in  behalf  of  national 
freedom,  he  is  fully  conscious  of  the  work  to  which 
he  is  called.  Although  he  stands  alone,  the  end? 
he  pursues  are  not  personal.  And  though  his  peo- 
ple sink  so  deeply  into  cowardice  and  weakness, 
as  to  deny  him,  yet  all  his  powers  are  directed 
against  the  enemies  of  this  people.  Although  he 
himself  has  scarcely  escaped  from  their  hands,  and 
has  no  one  to  stand  by  bis  side,  he  nevertheless 
considers  himself  their  leader  and  champion,  iv 
duty  bound  to  vindicate  the  honor  and  glory  of 
Israel  against  the  Philistines.  Properly  speaking, 
no  one  was  delivered  in  the  conflict  on  Ramath 
Lehi  but  himself;  but  he  thanks  God  for  "the 
great  salvation  given  by  the  hand  of  thy  servant.'' 
He  finds  this  salvation  in  the  humiliation  expe- 
rienced by  the  Philistines,  and  in  the  fact  that  he, 
as  sole  representative  of  the  true  Israel,  has  not 
been  allowed  to  be  put  to  shame.  For  with  his 
fall,  the  last  bulwark  had  been  leveled.  The 
shouts  of  the  Philistines  over  his  bonds  were  shout? 
of  triumph  over  the  faith  of  Israel  and  over  Is- 
rael's God.  Hence  he  can  pray  :  "  Thou  hast  just 
performed  a  great  deed  through  me,  by  which  the 
honor  of  the  national  name  of  the  children  of 
Israel  has  been  rescued  and  exalted,  let  me  not 
now  die  of  thirst,  and  in  that  way  fall  into  the 
hands  of  the  uncircumcised."  All  benefit  of  the 
victory  would  be  lost,  if  Samson  were  now  to  per- 
ish. The  triumph  of  the  cowardly  enemy  would 
be  greater  than  ever,  should  they  next  see  him  as 
a  helpless  corpse.  He  speaks  of  them  as  "  the  un 
circumcised"  for  the  very  purpose  of  expressing 
his  consciousness  that  with  him  to  fight,  to  con- 
quer, and  to  fall,  are  not  personal  matters,  hut 
involve  principles.  He  is  none  other  than  the 
Nazir  of  God,  i.  e.,  the  consecrated  warrior  for  God 
and  his  people  Israel  against  the  enemies  of  the 
divine  covenant  —  the  uncircumcised.  His  petition 
springs  from  the  profound  emotion  into  which  the 
successive  experiences  of  this  day  have  plunged 
him.  The  greater  his  ardor  in  battle  and  joy  in 
victory,  the  more  painful  is  now  the  thought  of 
losing  the  fruits  of  the  advantage  gained,  for  want 
of  a  little  water.  Here,  too,  what  instruction  we 
find  !  "  What  is  man  that  thou  art  mindful  of 
him."  The  mighty  warrior,  before  whom  thou- 
sands tremble,  cannot  conquer  thirst,  and  must  per- 
ish unless  a  fountain  opens  itself. 

Ver.  19.  And  God  clave  the  mortar  that  was 
in  Lehi.  At  the  place  where  Samson  was,  God 
clave  a  mortar-like  cavity  in  the  rock,  from  which 
water  sprang,  of  which  Samson  drank,  and  re- 
freshed himself.  This  spring  was  ever  after  named 
"  Well  of  him  that  called ; "  for  it  was  his  salva- 
tion and  second  deliverance.  The  words  at  the 
close  of  our  verse,  "which  (well)  is  in  Lehi  unto 
this  day,"  to  which  those  at  the  beginning  of  the 
verse  correspond,  "  God  clave  the  mortar  that  wa? 
in  Lehi,"  put  it  beyond  all  doubt  that  the  refe; 

the  term  which  it  regularly  employs  to  express  ^SID  HI?  ; 
but  Gesenius  and  others  before  him  made  a  mistake  whra 
they  took  TV*!™!  /  as  the  proper  name  of  a  locality.  It 
was  only  a  general  term,  pagua,  village,  which  was  tmu 
lated  into  ~lV  (^V). 


210 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


encc  is  to  a  mortar-like  well-opening  in  the  place 
Lehi,  and  that  (as  Keil  very  well  remarked)  the 
old,  frequently  reproduced  exposition  (approved 
also  by  Bertheau),  which  bids  us  think  of  "  the 
60cket  of  a  tooth  in  the  jaw-bone,"  is  entirely  erro- 
neous. For  from  ver.  17,  where  Samson  throws 
the  jaw-bone  away,  nothing  more  is  said  about  it, 
and  the  name  Lehi  refers  only  to  the  place  ;  just 
as  in  ver.  9  the  meaning  is,  not  that  the  Philistines 
spread  themselves  about  a  real  jaw-bone,  but  about 
the  place  of  this  name.  The  well,  it  is  said,  "is 
in  Lehi  unto  this  day."  The  place  derived  its 
name,  Ramath-lehi,  from  the  battle  of  the  jaw- 
bone; but  the  place  was  not  the  jaw-bone,  which 
could  not  exist  "  unto  this  day."  The  calling 
forth  of  the  well  was  a  second  deliverance,  distinct 
from  the  first,  which  was  won  in  battle.  It  oc- 
curred at  Lehi,  where  Samson  had  conquered,  in 
order  that  he  might  there  also  experience  the  van- 
ity of  all  strength  without  God.  The  old  opinion 
arose  from  the  fact  that,  except  in  ver.  9,  the  an- 
cient versions  (the  Sept.)  everywhere  translated 
the  term  Lehi,  whereas  it  is  a  proper  noun  in  ver. 
19  as  much  as  in  ver.  9,  as  Bochart  should  have 
known  precisely  from  the  article,  for  it  is  used  in 
all  three  instances,  ver.  9  included.  It  is  indeed 
true  that  later  medical  writers  call  the  sockets  of 
the  double  teeth  S\uoi,  mortars ;  but,  granted  that 
a  similar  usus  loquendi  prevailed  in  the  Bible, — of 
which  we  have  no  other  evidence  than  this  passage 
can  give,  —  the  use  of  the  article  would  be  sur- 
prising, because  elsewhere  (as  in  Zeph.  i.  11)  it 
points  (in  connection  with  the  noun  C£l?0)  j0  a 
certain  definite,  mortar-like 1  locality.  Mention 
might  also  be  made  of  the  cities  in  Phrygia  and 
Cilicia  that  bore  the  name  Holmos.  The  true  view 
was  already  held  by  Josephus,  the  Chaldee  Tar- 
gum,  and,  with  peculiar  clearness,  by  R.  Levi  ben 
Gerson.  Perhaps  it  would  receive  further  illustra- 
tion from  the  locality  which  we  may  probably  ven- 
ture to  fix  upon  for  the  event.  For  the  question 
where  the  event  took  place  is  not  unimportant. 
It  must  be  assumed  (cf.  vers.  13,  14)  that  Etara 
and  Lehi  were  not  far  distant  from  each  other. 
Moreover,  it  is  evident  from  the  connection  of  the 
entire  narrative,  that  the  Philistines  must  have 
threatened  especially  that  part  of  Judah  which  lay 
contiguous  to  the  region  whence  Samson  made  his 
attacks.  For  this  reason  alone,  the  opinion  of  Van 
de  Velde  (adopted  by  Keil),  who  looks  for  it  on 
the  road  from  Tell  Kewelfeh  to  Beer-sheba,  ap- 
pears improbable.  On  the  other  hand,  .the  very 
ancient  tradition  which  locates  the  Well  of  Lehi 
in  the  vicinity  of  Eleutheropolis,  appears  to  me, 
notwithstanding  all  opposition,  to  be  entirely  prob- 
able. It  was  by  a  series  of  interesting  observa- 
tions and  arguments  that  Robinson,  Rodiger,  and 
others,  established  the  fact  that  Eleutheropolis  and 
the  modern  Beit  Jibrin,  the  Betogabra  of  the 
Tabula  Peutingeriana,  are  the  same  place  (cf.  Rit- 
ter,  xvi.  139) ;  but  the  hints  of  the  Midrash  might 
have  led  to  the  same  conclusion,  and  even  now 
afford  additional  instruction.  To  the  peculiarities 
of  the  region  belong  the  numerous  cave-formations, 
which,  by  their  more  or  less  perfect  artificial  finish, 
prove  themselves  to  have  been  the  abodes  of  men 

1  Including,  doubtless,  e.  comparison  with  the  hard, 
rocky  nature  of  a  mortar. 

.  Ansii.  Rabba,  §  42,  p.  37  b.  The  right  reading  has 
teen  preserved  by  Anich,  sub  voce.  Our  editions  of  the 
Hidrash  read  mttropolis,  which  only  uncritical  editors  could 
have  overlooked,  since  the  explanation  which  follows  indi- 
aatee  the  true  reading. 


in  ancient  times.     "HF!  (cAor)  is  a  cavern,  and  the 

term  >~]H  (Chorite,  E.  V.  Horite)  signifies  troglo- 
dytes, people  who  dwell  in  caverns.  Now,  wher- 
ever the  Chorite  is  spoken  of,  the  Midrash  explains 
by  substituting  Eleutheropolis.'-  It  has  not  hith- 
erto been  discovered  what  circumstance  induced 
the  Romans  to  give  this  beautiful  name  to  the 
place.  But  since  the  tradition  of  an  heroic  ex- 
ploit (H  vi"T3  n^;lt£7.Fl)  was  connected  with  the 
place,  the  Jewish  inhabitants  derived  the  name 
•nin  fVa  or  "nin  TS,    which   it    may  have 

borne,  not  from  TO,  a  cavern,  but  from  "in,  a 
freeman.  "  Bene  Chorin,"  is  the  title  assumed  by 
those  whom  heroic  feats  have  made  free.3  The  same 
idea  leads  the  Midrash  when  it  derives  Eleuther- 
opolis from  chiruth,  freedom.  The  name  Eleuther- 
opolis was,  in  fact,  only  a  translation  of  the  ancient 
name,  whose  meaning  the  inhabitants  had  changed 
from  "  City  of  the  Troglodyte "  to  "  City  of  the 
Free,"  and  is  undeniably  found  in  the  Mishna  and 

Talmud  under  the  forms  T'~!in  jTU  and  fY»a 

■pTHn.  If  the  inhabitants  expound  the  present 
name  Beit  Jibrin  as  meaning  "  House  of  Gabriel," 
every  one  capable  of  forming  a  judgment  in  the 
case  perceives  at  once  that  this  became  possible 
only  with  the  prevalence  of  Islam  in  those  regions. 
But  as  the  name  itself  is  older  than  Islam,  and  is 

apparently  found  in  the  Midrash  (as  'P"Q'U  n>2, 
Beth  Goberin),  the  conjecture  suggests  itself  that  it 
is  related  to  ~li23,  hero,  i"Pfi3|,  heroism  ;  which, 
if  true,  connects  it  once  more  with  Samson's 
achievement.  The  "  House  of  Heroism  "  answers 
entirely  to  the  "House  of  Freedom."  And  it  is 
at  least  not  impossible  that  a  change  of  etymolog- 
ical  derivation,  like  that  in  the  case  of  Chorite, 

occurred    here   also,  mamely,  from    Sa'Q,   212, 

a  hole,  to  "1132,  a  hero.     The  expression  m2I 

7~*n,  in  the  sense  of  jaw-bone,  occurs  also. 

The  change  of  the  "  Troglodytes'  City "  into 
the  "  City  of  Heroes,"  demonstrates  the  existence 
of  an  old  tradition,  which,  so  far  as  the  names 
(Freedom,  Heroism)  can  explain  anything,  spoke 
of  the  hero  who  there  became  free.  Springs  are 
still  found  near  the  city.  One  in  particular,  near 
the  Church  of  St.  Anne,  flows  from  the  hard  rock, 
is  "  fifty-two  feet  deep,  and  apparently  ancient " 
(Rob.  ii.  26).  It  is  to  be  noted  that  Josephus 
makes  Samson's  fountain  to  spring  out  of  a  rock, 
and  declares  that  its  name  was  still  known  in  his 
day.     The  Targum   likewise  says  that  God  did 

split  the  rock  (H-^?),  and  translates:  "They 
called  it '  the  well  that  arose  at  the  prayer  of  Sam- 
son,' and  it  exists  in  Lehi  unto  this  day." 

No  other  well  than  this  [one  near  the  church  of 
St.  Anne],  can  be  intended  by  Jerome,  when  on 
passing  Socoh,  he  visits  the  Fountain  of  Samson 
[Ep.  ad  Eust.,  106,  ed.  Benedict.  86).  The  tradi- 
tion continued  steadfast  until  the  time  of  Anto- 
ninus Martyr,  who  says  {circa  600  a.  D.) :  "We 

S  Cf.  Buitorff,  Lex.,  p.  836.  Israel  calls  itself  by  toil 
name  in  the  beautiful  hymn  Pesach  haggadhah,  with  refer- 
ence to  the  time  when  Messiah  shall  have  made  it  free.  Ii 
is  true,  at  least,  that  He  alone  makes  free. 

4  On  the  consentaneous  position  of  the  place,  jf.  full 
in  Benj.  of  Tudela,  ii.  438,  note. 


CHAPTER  XVI.    1-3. 


211 


came  into  the  city  called  Eliotropolis,  where  Sam- 
ion,  that  most  valiant  man,  slew  a  thousand  men 
with  a  jaw-bone,  out  of  which  jaw-bone,  at  his 
prayer,  water  sprang  forth,  which  fountain  irri- 
gates that  place  unto  this  day :  and  we  were  at 
the  place  where  it  rises."  Traditions  reaching  so 
far  beyond  the  age  of  Islam,  are  always  worthy  of 
attention,  especially  when  they  suit  so  well  in  their 
localities.  For  the  distance  from  Eleutheropolis 
combines  very  well  with  the  theatre  of  Samson's 
exploits  hitherto,  and  confirms  our  assumption 
that  Etam  lay  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  present 
Deir  Dubban.  When  the  Jews  grounded  the  name 
"  City  of  Freedom  "  on  this  tradition,  they  followed 
considerations  not  only  beautiful,  but  also  both 
ethically  and  historically  correct. 

It  is  unquestionably  a  remarkable  feature  in  the 
narrative  of  the  occurrence,  that,  while  Samson 
prays  to  "Jehovah,"  the  answer  is  ascribed  to 
"  Elohim  :  "  "  Elohim  clave  the  mortar."  Keil's 
explanation,  that  it  is  thereby  intimated  that  God 
worked  the  miracle  as  Lord  of  nature,  does  not 
seem  sufficient.  For  is  not  "  Jehovah  "  the  Cre- 
ator of  Nature  ?  The  Targum  uses  that  name 
here.  According  to  our  view  of  the  relations  of 
the  names  Jehovah  and  Elohim  in  our  Book,  the 
latter  appears  not  only  when  heathen  gods  are 
spoken  of,  but  also  when  others  than  believing 
Israelites  speak  of  God.  Elohim  is  here  used  in 
Drder  to  intimate  that  non-Israelites  also  ascribed 
the  wonderful  fountain  in  Lehi  to  divine  inter- 
vention. Not  only  Israel  tells  of  it,  how  Jehovah 
clave  it,  but  all  admit  that  it  is  a  work  of  Elohim. 

Ver.  20.  And  Samson  judged  Israel,  in  the 
days  of  the  Philistines,  twenty  years.  In  the 
introduction  to  the  history  of  Samson  (ch.  xiii.  1), 
it  is  stated  that  the  Philistines  lorded  it  over  Israel 
forty  years.  In  ch.  xiii.  5  it  is  said :  "  he  shall 
begin  to  deliver  Israel "  Their  entire  downfall  he 
did  not  accomplish.  The  blame  of  this  rested  not 
only  with  the  people,  of  whom  ch.  xiii.  does  not 
6ay  that  they  had  repented,  but,  as  ch.  xvi.  shows, 
also  with  Samson.  But  the  twenty  years  during 
which  he  wrought  are  not  filled  out  by  the  occur-, 
rences  related.  These  only  indicate  what  feats  and 
dangers  were  necessary  to  qualify  Samson  for  gov- 
ernment in  Israel.  And  it  may  well  be  supposed 
that  after  this  the  Philistines  scarcely  undertook  to 
confront  him.  Doubtless,  the  tribe  of  Judah  also, 
must  after  this  last  exploit  have  acknowledged  his 
divine  strength,  and  yielded  him  their  confidence 
He  himself,  in  thirst  and  faintness,  had  learned 
that  God  alone  gives  strength  and  help  ;  and  this 
may  have  served  for  the  moral  elevation  of  the 
people  also.  Israel  dwelt  in  security  and  peace  for 
twenty  years,  through  the  consecration  and  deeds 


of  Samson.  For  this  reason  he  stood  among  them 
as  Judge.  It  was  only  the  want  of  courage  on 
Israel's  part  —  due  to  its  imperfect  faith  — and  the 
excess  of  it  on  Samson's  part,  that  plunged  both 
alike  into  new  distress  and  suffering. 


HOSLTLETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

[Bp.  Hall  :  The  Philistines  that  had  before 
ploughed  with  Samson's  heifer,  in  the  case  of  the 
riddle,  are  now  ploughing  a  worse  furrow  with  a 
heifer  more  his  own.  I  am  ashamed  to  hear  these 
cowardly  Jews  say,  Knowest  thou  not,  etc.  — 
Scott  :  Heartless  professors  of  religion,  who  value 
the  friendship  and  fear  the  frown  of  the  world,  and 
who  are  the  slaves  of  sin  and  Satan,  censure,  hate, 
and  betray  those  who  call  them  to  liberty  in  the 
service  of  God.  To  save  themselves,  in  times  of 
persecution,  they  often  apostatize  and  turn  betray- 
ers and  accusers  of  the  brethren.  —  Bp.  Hall  : 
Now  these  Jews,  that  might  have  let  themselves 
loose  from  their  own  bondage,  are  binding  their 
deliverer.  —  Henry  :  Thus  the  Jews  delivered  up 
our  Saviour,  under  pretense  of  a  fear  lest  the 
Romans  should  come,  and  take  away  their  place 
and  nation.  —  Wordsworth  .  This  conduct  of 
the  men  of  Judah,  saying  that  the  Philistines  are 
their  rulers,  and  delivering  Samson  to  them,  may 
be  compared  to  that  of  the  Jews,  saying,  "  We 
have  no  king  but  Ca?sar"  (John  xix.  15),  and  de- 
livering up  Christ  to  the  Romans. 

Wordsworth  (on  Samson's  victory) :  A  greater 
miracle  was  wrought  "in  the  time  of  wheat-harv- 
est" (cf.  ver.  1),  namely,  at  the  first  [Christian] 
Pentecost,  when  three  thousand  were  converted  by 
the  preaching  of  Peter  and  of  the  other  Apostles, 
filled  with  the  Spirit  of  God.  —  Bp.  Hall  :  This 
victory  was  not  in  the  weapon,  was  not  ill  the 
arm ;  it  was  in  the  Spirit  of  God,  which  moved 
the  weapon  in  the  arm.  O  God !  if  the  means  ba 
weak,  Thou  art  strong ! 

Henby  (on  Samson's  prayer) :  Past  experiences 
of  God's  power  and  goodness,  are  excellent  pleas 
in  prayer  for  further  mercy.  "  Lest  the  uncircum- 
cised  triumph,  and  so  it  redound  to  God's  dis- 
honor." The  best  pleas  are  those  taken  from 
God's  glory.  —  Kitto  :  Not  many  would  have  had 
such  strong  persuasion  of  the  Lord's  providential 
care  as  would  lead  them  to  cry  to  Him  for  water 
to  supply  their  personal  wants  in  the  like  exi- 
gency. 

Henry  (on  En-hakkore) :  Many  a  spring  of 
comfort  God  opens  to  his  people  which  may  fitly 
be  called  by  this  name :  it  is  the  "  well  of  him  that 
cried."  — Tk.] 


Samson  visits  Gaza.     The  Philistines  meditate  his  destruction  ;  but  he  escapes  at 
midnight,  carrying  the  gate  of  the  city  away  with  him. 

Chapter  XVI.  1-3. 


1  Then  went  Samson  [And  Samson  went]  to  Gaza  ['Azzah],  and  saw  there  au 

2  harlot,  and  went  in  unto  her.1  And  it  was  told*  the  Gazites  ['Azzites],  saying, 
Samson  is  come  hither.  And  they  compassed  him 3  in,  and  laid  wait  for  him  all 
night  in  the  gate  of  the  city,  and  were  quiet  all  the  night,  saying,  In  the  morning 


212 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


3  when  it  is  day  we  shall  kill  him.4  And  Samson  lay  till  midnight,  and  [he]  arose  at 
midnight,  and  took  [laid  hold  of]  the  doors  of  the  gate  of  the  city,  and  the  twc 
posts,  and  went  away  with  them  [pulled  them  up],  bar  and  all,  and  put  them  upon 
his  shoulders,  and  carried  them  up  to  the  top  of  an  [the]  hill  that  is  before  He- 
bron. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  1.  —  PPbs  S3S1.  Dr.  Cassel,  in  accordance  with  his  exposition  (see  below),  renders,  und  kam  zu  ihr 
"and  came  (went)  to  her."  This  rendering  is  certainly  possible  (cf.  Gen.  vi.  20;  Ps.  li.  1,  etc.) ;  but  as  the  expression  U 
a  standing  euphemism,  the  writer  of  Judges  would  scarcely  have  employed  it  in  its  more  proper  sense  here,  where  the 
context  would  inevitably  suggest  the  least  favorable  interpretation.  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  2.  —  ^sl  (cf.  Gen.  xxii.  20)  or  VHtpS'l,  has  doubtless  been  dropped  out  of  the  text  by  some  oversighi  of 
transcribers.  The  Sept.,  Targum,  and  other  ancient  versions,  supply  the  deficiency,  if  indeed  it  existed  in  their  day 
—  TR] 

[8  Ver.  2.  —  !QbsT  :  the  accusative  (cf.  Eccles.  ix.  14)  object  of  this  verb  is  to  be  disengaged  from  17,  the  object 
of  the  immediately  following  verb.  So  Bertheau  and  Keil.  Dr.  Cassel  takes  the  word  in  the  sense  "  to  go  about,"  to 
patrol,  which  would  require  the  object  I^V  (Isa.  xxiii.  16)  or  T372  (Cant.  in.  3)  to  be  expressed.  —  Tr.] 

[4  Ver.  2.  —  fflrni  "Iparj  -)iS""T?  :  literally,  "  Until  morning  light!  then  we  kill  him."  That  is,  "  Wait 
(or,  with  reference  to  the  preceding  iltnniT'  :  Be  quiet)  until  morning  light,"  etc.  Cf.  1  Sam.  i.  22.  "ITS  i«  *h« 
Infinitive  construct,  cf.  Ges.  Lex.  a.  v.  "TV,  B,  2,  b.  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  1.  And  Samson  went  to  'Azzah.  The 
heroic  deeds  of  Samson  have  driven  the  Philistines 
back  within  their  old  boundary-lines.  They  no 
longer  venture  to  come  anywhere  near  him.  He, 
however,  with  the  fearlessness  of  genius,  under- 
takes to  visit  them  in  their  own  fortified  chief  city. 
'Azzah,  the  Gaza  of  the  Greeks,  was  the  most 
powerful  border-city  and  capital  of  the  Philistines. 
There,  as  in  Gath  and  Ashdod,  remnants  of  the 
Anakim  are  said  to  have  remained  (Josh.  xi.  22). 

Concerning  the  etymology  of  the  name  ^V 
('Azzah),  different  opinions  have  been  expressed. 

Hitzig's  derivation  from  f.V,  "  she-goat,"  has  been 
justly  called  in  question  by  Stark  ( Gaza  und  die 
philist.  Kiiste,  p.  46).  But  by  the  side  of  the  view 
which,   after  the  older  authorities  (from  Jerome 

down)  he  adopts  —  which  makes  nj5  to  be  "  the 
6trong,  fortified  city,"  in  contrast  with  the  open 
country,  and  appeals  to  such  names  as  Rome  and 
Valentia  as  analogous  —  I  would  place  another, 
perhaps  more  accordant  with  the  national  spirit  of 
the  Philistines.  The  origin  of  the  name  must 
probably  be  sought  in  the  worship  of  Mars-Ty- 
phon,  the  warlike  Death-god.  Movers  has  com- 
pared 'A^o-ia,  the  Troezenian  name  of  Persephone, 

with  HJP  (Phonizier,  i.  367).  "Strong,"  in  the 
true  sense  of  the  word,  may  be  appropriately  pred- 
icated  of   death ;    accordingly  it   is    said    in  the 

"  Song  of  Solomon  "  (ch.  viii.  6) :  "  Strong  (n*J?) 
as  death  is  love."  To  the  name  'Afijo-i'o  (Azesia) 
not  only  el-Asa,  the  idol  of  the  ancient  Arabians 
(Mars-Asiz)  would  correspond,  but  also  and  espe- 
cially 'N*JS  (Azazel),  to  whom  the  Mosaic  law 
sent  the  goat  laden  with  the  sins  of  the  people. 
The  name  'Azzah  had  its  origin  in  the  service  of 
subterranean,  typhonic  deities,  peculiar  to  the 
•oasts  of  the  Mediterranean  sea.  Although  the 
Gm-ks  called  the  city  Gaza,  it  is  nevertheless  clear 
that  the  Indo-Germanic  etymology  of  this  word 
(yifa),  which  signifies  "  public  treasure,"  is  not  to 
3e  brought  into  comparison. 
Samscn  comes  not,  alas!  like  the  tribe  of  Judah 


(ch.  i.  18),  to  conquer  the  city.  But  it  is  a  ques- 
tion whether  the  sensuality  which  at  other  times 
lulled  his  heroism  to  sleep,  was  also  the  occasion 
of  his  present  visit  to  Gaza.  The  cultus  of  the 
Canaanitish  nations,  and  the  beauty  of  the  Philis- 
tine  women,   were   favorable    to   voluptuousness. 

Ancient  expositors  explained  H21T  to  mean  a  fe- 
male inn-keeper,  a  hostess.  They  were  so  far 
right,  that  the  houses  of  harlots  were  those  that 
stood  open  to  all  comers,  including  such  strangers 
as  had  no  relations  of  acquaintance  and  mutual 
hospitality  with  any  one  in  the  city.  (Compare, 
in  Latin,  the  transition  into  each  other  of  caupo 
and  leno,  caupona  and  lena.)  Hence,  the  Targum 
has  everywhere  (including  Judg.  xi.  1)  translated 

rt3i?   by  HTPlTJ?©!  i.  e-,  "female  innkeeper," 

irai/5<f/ceia.  On  this  account,  the  spies,  also,  whom 
Joshua  sent  out,  and  who  were  influenced  by  no 
sensual  impulses,  could  quarter  themselves  no- 
where in  Jericho  but  in  the  house  of  a  zonah  (Josh, 
ii.  1 ).  Samson  did  not  come  to  Gaza  for  the  pur- 
pose of  visiting  a  harlot:  for  it  is  said  that  "he 
went  thither,  and  saw  there  a  zonah."  But  when 
he  wished  to  remain  there  over  night,  there  was 
nothing  for  him,  the  national  enemy,  but  to  abide 
with  the  zonah.  This  time  the  narrative  gives  no 
occasion  to  tax  him  with  sensuality.  We  do  not 
read,  as  in  ver.  4,  "and  he  loved  her."  His  stay 
is  spoken  of  in  language  not  different  from  that 
employed  with  reference  to  the  abode  of  the  spies 
in  the  house  of  Rahab.  The  words,  "  he  saw 
her,"  only  indicate  that  when  he  saw  a  woman  of 
her  class,  he  knew  where  he  could  find  shelter  for 
the  night.  The  purpose  of  his  coming  was  to  give 
the  Philistines  a  new  proof  of  his  fearlessness, 
which  was  such  that  he  did  not  shun  to  meet  them 
in  their  own  chief  city. 

Ver.  2.  And  when  the  'Azzites  were  told, 
that  Samson  was  come  thither.  He  had  been 
seen.  It  was  probably  towards  evening  when  he 
entered  the  city.  The  houses  in  which  the  trade 
of  a  zonah  was  carried  on,  lay  anciently  and  still 
lie  on  the  walls  of  the  city  (Josh.  ii.  IS),  not  fa: 
from  the  gates.  Although  it  is  not  stated  whet.iei 
the  inhabitants  knew  where  he  was,  it  must  be 
assumed  that  they  did;  for,  being  in  the  city,  h« 


CHAPTER   XVI.  1-3. 


213 


had  no  choice  a.-  to  his  place  of  abode.  The  king 
of  Jericho  commands  Rahab  to  deliver  up  the 
spies;  but  the  description  here  given  of  the  way 
in  which  the  'Azzites  set  to  work  to  catch  the 
dreaded  foe,  is  highly  amusing  and  characteristic. 
The  most  direct  way  would  have  been  to  have 
attacked  him  in  the  house  of  the  zonah;  but  that 
course  they  avoid.  They  propose  to  lie  in  wait  for 
him  when  he  comes  out.     Our  author's  use  of  the 

imperfects  ^2^*]  and  Jn"pS*l_  's  peculiar  and  in- 
teresting. That  of  which  they  speak,  and  say  it 
must  be  done,  as  :  "patrols  must  go  about,"  and 
"  bands  must  lie  in  wait  all  night  at  the  gate,"  the 
graphic  narrator  relates  as  if  it  were  actually  done. 
They  did  nothing  of  the  kind,  however,  but  instead 
of  patrolling  and  watching  "all  night,"  they  were 

afraid,  and  kept  quiet  "all  night"  (nv?v>fT"?3, 
used  twice  in  order  to  hint  at  the  contrast  between 
counsel  and  action  which  they  exhibited).  They 
should  doubtless  have  been  on  their  legs  through- 
out the  night,  but  in  fact  they  •ItS'ini'V,  kept 
themselves  still,  made  no  noise,  and  heard  nothing, 
just  as  a  timid  householder,  who  is  afraid  of  the 
burglar,  feigns  to  be  fast  asleep,  so  as  not  to  be 
obliged  to  hear  the  robbery  going  mi.  The  gate, 
they  say  to  each  other,  is  firmly  fastened,  so  that 
he  cannot  get  out  of  the  city,  and  to-morrow,  at 
6unrise,  we  have  certainly  killed  him  (the  narrator 
again  represents  the  thing  talked  about  as  done, 

^njDITp-  "  Ah  yes,  to-morrow ! "  To-morrow, 
to-morrow,  only  not  to-day,  is  the  language  of  all 
lazy  people  —  and  of  the  timorous  as  well.1 

Ver.  3.  But  Samson  slept  till  midnight.  He 
had  been  told  that  his  presence  in  Gaza  was 
known.  How  little  fear  he  felt,  appears  from  the 
tact  that  he  slept  till  midnight.  Then  he  arose, 
went  calmly  to  the  gate,  and  (as  it  was  closed  and 
barred)  lifted  out  its  posts,  placed  the  doors  on  bis 
shoulders,  and  tranquilly  proceeded  on  his  way 
home.  Humor  and  strength  characterized  all  his 
deeds.  On  this  occasion,  however,  the  mighty  jest 
which  he  played  off  on  the  inhabitants  of  Gaza, 
was  also  the  worst  humiliation  which  he  could  in- 
flict upon  them.  The  gates  of  a  place  symbolized 
its  civic  ami  national  strength,  inasmuch  as  they 
represented  ingress  into  it.  Samson  enacted  lit- 
erally, as  it  were,  the  promise  made  to  Abraham  : 
"  Thy  seed  shall  possess  the  gate  of  its  enemies  " 
(Gen.  xxii.  17).  The  fact  that  Rebecca  is  dis- 
missed with  the  same  blessing  (Gen.  xxiv.  60) : 
"  May  thy  seed  possess  the  gate  of  those  who  hate 
it !  "  indicates  the  popular  diffusion  of  the  idea 
that  to  take  possession  of  an  enemy's  gate  is  to 
obtain  a  complete  victory  over  him.  Hence,  in 
the  East  victorious  princes  have  frequently  literally 
carried  away  the  gates  of  conquered  cities  (cf. 
Hammer,  Gesch.  des  Osman.  Reichs,  i.  267).  For 
the  same  reason,  Almansor,  when  he  took  Com- 
postella,  caused  the  doors  of  the  St.  James'  Church 
to  be  lifted  out,  and  to  be  carried  on  the  shoulders 

1  [The  above  explanation  of  ver.  2  is  more  ingenious 
than  satisfactory.  The  text  does  not  speak  of  what  the 
Philistines  said  ought  to  be  done,  but  of  what  was  done. 
It  is  true,  that  this  view  meets  with  the  difficulty  of  ex- 
phuning  how  Samson  could  carry  off  the  gate,  and  the 
watehera  be  apparently  none  the  wiser.  The  answer  is 
probably  that  after  the  guards  and  liers-in-w*it  were  posted, 


of  Christians,  to  Cordova,  in  sign  of  his  victory 
(Ferreras,  Gesch.  von  Spanien,  iii.  145).  The  same 
idea  presents  itself  in  North-German  leeends.  when 
giants  are  represented  as  carrying  away  churches 
from  their  places,  in  order  to  show  their  hostility 
against  Christianity  (Sehambach  and  Muller,  Nie- 
ders.  Sagen,  pp.  150,  151). 

But  precisely  because  the  removal  of  the  gate 
of  Gaza  was  expressive  of  the  national  humiliation 
of  the  Philistines  before  Israel — Israel  having,  as 
it  were,  in  the  person  of  its  representative,  taken 
their  chief  city  by  storm  —  it  is  necessary  to  take 
the  statement  that  Samson  carried  the  gate  "  up 

to  the  top  of  the  mountain  before  C,22"7^)  He- 
bron," in  a  more  literal  sense  than  Keil  feels  him- 
self bound  to  do.  Hebron  was  the  centre  and 
chief  seat  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  It  was  probably 
the  abode  of  Samson  also  during  the  twenty  years 
of  his  judgeship.  Israel's  triumph  and  thePhilis- 
tines'  ignominy  were  both  most  plainly  expressed 
when  the  gate  of  Gaza  was  lying  before  Hebron  ; 
for  it  was  found  appropriate  to  carry  the  gates  of 
the  chief  city  of  the  enemy  to  the  chief  city  of  the 
conqueror,  otherwise  Hebron  would  not  have  been 
mentioned  at  all.  As  to  the  difficulty  of  carrying 
the  gate  so  far  as  Hebron,  it  is  unnecessary  to 
waste  a  word  upon  it.  He  who  wrenched  the  gate 
from  its  firm  security,  could  also  carry  it  to  He- 
bron. Besides,  as  soon  as  he  was  in  Judaea,  he 
had  time  enough.  In  Hebron  the  evidences  of  the 
great  hero's  triumph  and  the  Philistines' humilia- 
tion were  probably  exhibited  long  after  the  event 
took  place.  Even  when  nations  seem  least  capa- 
ble of  doing  great  things,  it  is  yet  a  cheering  sign, 
promissory  of  better  days,  if  they  take  pleasure  in 
the  great  deeds  of  former  times.  Israel  was  in 
servitude  for  the  very  reason  that  it  no  longer 
knew  the  greatness  of  its  ancestors  (ch.  ii.  10). 
Whoever  takes  pleasure  in  Samson,  affords  some 
ground  to  hope  for  freedom. 


HOMILETICAL    AND   PRACTICAL. 

The  ancient  church  used  the  gate  of  Gaza,  as  a 
type  of  the  gates  of  hell  destroyed  by  Christ.  A 
modern  art-critic,  it  is  true,  has  remarked  that 
most  of  the  pictures  which  were  supposed  to  be 
representations  of  Samson,  carrying  away  the 
gates  of  Gaza,  are  not  such,  but  represent  the  par- 
alytic of  the  gospels,  who  took  up  his  bed  and 
walked  (Martigny,  Dictionnaire,  p.  599).  But  the 
essential  matter  is,  not  the  pictures,  lmt  the  spirit. 
Gaza  is,  as  it  were,  the  stronghold  of  the  enemy. 
Samson,  who  enters  it,  resembles  Christ,  who  is 
laid  in  the  grave.  But  the  enemy  cannot  bind  the 
living  Word.  He  not  only  rises  from  the  dead,  but 
He  deprives  the  fortress  of  its  gates,  so  that  it  can 
no  longer  detain  any  who  would  be  free.  Only 
he  remains  a  captive,  in  whom  sin  reigns,  and  pas- 
sion is  supreme  —  who  would  be  free  from  Christ. 

these  rendered  sleepv  by  inaction  (^tf'Hr^/T)    and  confl- 

:  t    :  • 
dent  that  Samson  would  not  leave  the  zonah  uutil  morn- 
ing, became  f'  quiet  "  in  a  sense   beyond  that   intended  by 
the   instructions   they  had    received  —  in  other  wordB,  ti 
lowed  themselves  to  fali  asleep.      Cf.  Bert!  eau  and  Kei- 
TR.J 


214  THE   BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


Samson's  fall.     He  loves  a  Philistine  woman,  and,  confiding  to  her  the  secret  of  Ml 
strength,  is  betrayed  into  the  hands  of  his  enemies. 

Chapter  XVI.  4-20. 

4  And  it  came  to  pass  afterward  [after  this],  that  he  loved  a  woman  in  the  valley  of 

5  Sorek,  whose  name  was  Delilah.  And  the  lords  [princes]  of  the  Philistines  came 
up  unto  her,  and  said  unto  her,  Entice  [Persuade]  him,  and  see  wherein  his  great 
strength  lieth,  and  by  what  means  we  may  prevail  against  him,  that  we  may  bind  him 
to  afflict  [lit.  humble,  i.  e..  subdue]  him  :  and  we  will  give  thee  every  one  of  us  eleven  hun- 

6  dred  pieces  of  silver.  Anil  Delilah  said  to  Samson,  Tell  me,  I  pray  thee,  wherein 
thy  great  strength  lieth,  and  wherewith  thou  mightest  be  bound  to  afflict  [subdue] 

7  thee.  And  Samson  said  unto  her,  If  they  bind  me  with  seven  green  withs  [moist 
cords],1  that  were  never  [have  not  been]  dried,  then  shall  I  be  weak,  and  be  as  an- 

8  other  [any  other]  man.  Then  the  lords  [princes]  of  the  Philistines  brought  up  to  her 
seven  green  withs  [moist  cords],  which  had  not   been  dried,  aud  she  bound  him 

9  with  them.  (Now  there  were  men  lying  in  wait,  abiding  with  her  in  the  chamber.)2 
And  she  said  unto  him,  The  Philistines  be  upon  thee,  Samson.  And  he  brake  the 
withs  [cords]  as  a  thread  of  tow  is  broken  when  it  toucheth  [smelleth]  the  fire.     So 

10  his  strength  was  not  known.  And  Delilah  said  unto  Samson,  Behold,  thou  hast 
mocked  [deceived]  me,  and  told  me  lies  :  now  tell  me,  I  pray  thee,  wherewith  thou 

11  mightest  be  bound.  And  he  said  unto  her.  If  they  bind  me  fast  [omit:  fast]  with 
new  ropes  that  never  were  occupied  [with  which  no  work  was  ever  done],  then  shall 

12  I  be  weak,  and  be  as  another  [any  other]  man.  Delilah  therefore  took  new  ropes, 
and  bound  him  therewith,  and  said  unto  him,  The  Philistines  be  upon  thee,  Sam- 
son.    (And  there  were  liers  in  wait  abiding  in  the  chamber.)2     And  he  brake  them 

13  from  off  his  arms  like  a  thread.  And  Delilah  said  unto  Samson,  Hitherto  thou  hast 
mocked  [deceived]  me,  and  told  me  lies  :  tell  me  wherewith  thou  mightest  be  bound. 

14  And  he  said  unto  her,  If  thou  weavest  the  seven  locks  of  my  head  with  [i.  e.,  into] 
the  web  [i.  e.,  the  warp].  And  [she  did  so,  and]  she  fastened  it  with  the  pin,  and  said 
unto  him,  The  Philistines  be  upon  thee,  Samson.     And  he  awaked  out  of  his  sleep, 

15  and  went  away  with  [pulled  out]  the  pin  of  the  beam  [loom],  and  with  [omit :  with] 
the  web  [or,  warp].  And  she  said  unto  him,  How  canst  thou  say,  I  love  thee,  when 
thine  heart  is  not  with  me  ?    Thou  hast  mocked  [deceived]  me  these  three  times,  and 

1 6  hast  not  told  me  wherein  thy  great  strength  lieth.  And  it  came  to  pass  when  she 
pressed  him  daily  with  her  words,  and  urged  him,  so  that  his  soul  was  vexed  unto 

17  death;  That  he  told  her  all  his  heart,  and  said  unto  her,  There  hath  not  come  a 
razor  upon  mine  head  ;  for  I  have  been  [am]  a  Nazarite  unto  God  from  my  mother's 
womb :  if  I  be  shaven,  then  my  strength  will  go  from  me,  and  I  shall  become  weak, 

18  and  be  like  any  [all]  overman  [men].  And  when  [omit:  when]  Delilah  saw  that 
he  had  told  her  all  his  heart,  [and]  she  sent  and  called  for  the  lords  [princes]  of 
the  Philistines,  saying,  Come  up  this  once,  for  he  hath  shewed  me 3  all  his  heart. 
Then  the  lords  [princes]  of  the  Philistines  came  up  unto  her,  and  brought  [the] 

19  money  in  their  hand.  And  she  made  him  sleep  upon  her  knees;  and  she  called  for 
a  man,  and  she  caused  him  to  shave  [and  she  shaved]  4  off  the  seven  locks  of  his 

20  head ;  and  she  began  to  afflict  [subdue]  him,  and  his  strength  went  from  him.  And 
she  said,  The  Philistines  be  upon  thee,  Samson.  And  he  awoke  out  of  his  sleep, 
and  said,  I  will  go  out  as  at  other  times  before,  and  shake  myself  [free].5  And  he 
wist  not  that  the  Lord  [Jt-hovah]  was  departed  from  him. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 
[1  Ver.  7.  —  C^Plb  C-liT? :  literally,  "moist  cords  or  strings.''  Km:  "  "")fV  means  string,  t.  g\,  of  a  how,  P» 
li.  2  ,  and  in  Arabic  and  Syriac  both  bow-string  and  guitar-string.  Now  since  the  D,-VTJ  are  here  distinguished  trom 
the  C\""C1?  ropes  (ver.  11).  the  former  must  be  understood  of  animal  tendons  or  gut-strings."  It  is  certainly  in  feroi 
rf  thir  view  that  the  O^fV  are  to  be  "  moist,"  as  also  that  it  makes  a  strong  and  climactic  distinction  betwei  n  C^HiT 
IDd  D\""Q3?.      Compare  the  rendering  of  the  LXX.  :  vevpaU  iiypaU.  —  Ta.l 


CHAPTER  XVI.   4-20. 


215 


[2  Ver.  9. —  TinS  ^  '  2ti^  D^SH") :  "and  the  lurker  sat  for  her  in  the  apartment."  In  itself  considered, 
2™lS  might  be  collective,  as  rendered  by  the  E.  V.  (cf.  ch.  xx.  33) ;  but,  although  other  Philistines  may  have  been 
near  at  hand,  it  would  be  difficult  to  conceal  the  presence  in  the  room  itself  of  more  than  one,  and  hence  it  would  hardly 
be  attempted.  PT7  is  dat.  commodi.  The  rendering,  "  with  her,"  adopted  also  by  Cassel  (and  De  Wette),  is  not  indeed 
impossible,  but  gives  to  ^5  a  meaning  which  it  rarely  has,  and  which  is  here  less  suitable.  —  Ta.] 

8  Ver.  18. The  reading  ^S  of  the  keri  is  evidently  the  correct  one,  notwithstanding  Keil's  remarks  in  favor  of  pO, 

Keil  would  make  the  clause  a  remark  inserted  by  the  narrator  :  "  for  he  had  showed  her  (PI  s)  all  his  heart."  —  Ta.] 

[4  Ver.  19.  —  H  v3J*Tl  :  "  and  she  shaved."  The  piel  is  not  causative  here  ;  compare  the  pual  in  ver.  17.  The  E. 
V.  seems  to  accept  the  interpretation  of  the  Vulgate  and  Alex.  Sept.,  which  translate  t£TS  V  by  "  barber."  "  The 
man  "  (t£sK  V  =  U^KPTy)  is  probably  tha  Philistine  who  was  on  duty  at  the  time  as  «  lurker  • "  and  Delilah  oallj 
on  him,  in  order  to  have  somebody  near  to  defend  her  should  Samson  wake  during  the  shearing  process.    Cf.  Keil.  — Ta.] 

[5  Ver.  20.  —  *"I3?3S  :  Dr.  Cassel  translates,  will  mick  ermannen,  "put  on  and  assert  my  manhood."  He  suppose* 
Samson  to  see  the  Philistines,  and  to  express  his  determination  to  give  them  battle  as  heretofore  (see  below).  But  not 
to  say  that  H3?33  will  not  bear  this  sense,  it  seems  clear  that  the  "  other  times  "  refer  to  the  previous  attempts  of  Deli- 
lah to  master  his  secret.  —  Ta.] 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  4.  And  it  came  to  pass  that  he  loved  a 
woman  in  the  valley  of  Sorek,  ■whose  name  was 
Delilah.  Let  him  who  stands,  take  heed  lest  he 
fall.  This  is  valid  also  for  the  powerful  person- 
ality of  Samson.  It  is  true  that  the  adventures, 
in  which  sensuality  ensnared  him,  had  hitherto 
been  only  occasions  for  acting  as  the  hero  of  his 
people.  But  it  is  true  also  that  his  present  love 
differs  in  many  respects  from  that  which  he  gave 
to  the  woman  "of  Timnah.  Then  he  was  young, 
and  for  his  people's  sake  needed  natural  occasions 
for  war  against  the  Philistines  —  to  say  nothing 
of  the  fact  that  at  that  time  he  sought  lawful  mat- 
rimony. Now,  he  has  long  been  a  man.  His 
strength  and  greatness  need  no  more  demonstra- 
tion. Delilah  was  not  his  wife:  if  not  a  "zomth," 
Bhe  was  still  but  a  weaver-woman,  whom  he  saw 
and  loved.  Moral  dangers,  like  all  dangers,  may, 
in  the  providence  of  God,  serve  to  give  experience 
to  a  man,  and  afford  him  opportunities  for  vic- 
tory; but  to  run  into  them,  in  the  confidence  of 
winning  new  victories,  is  not  permitted,  even  to  a 
Samson.  The  "  Nazir  of  Elohim "  is  not  to  be 
measured  by  common  rules :  everything  is  lawful 
for  him ;  but  only  so  long  as  he  does  not  desecrate 
by  means  of  itself  the  strength  with  which  he  is 
endowed. 

By  giving  the  name  of  the  place  where,  and  of 
the  woman  whom,  Samson  loved,  the  narrator 
already  foreshadows  the  temptation  into  which  he 
placed  himself.  The  Nachal  ( Valley  of)  Sorek  is 
evidently  named  after  a  variety  of  the  grape  —  in 
appearance  almost  stoneless,  yet  provided  with  a 
soft  stone,  and  productive  of  a  precious  red  wine 
(cf.  Jer.  ii.  21  ;  Isa.  v.  2) — which  elsewhere  gives 
the  name  Kischmi  to  an  Arabian  island  (Ritter, 
xii.  452).  Of  the  position  of  the  Nachal  Sorek 
we  have  no  other  tradition  than  that  of  Eusebius, 
who  knew  a  place  named  Sorech  {al.  I.  Barech), 
xorth  of  Eleutheropolis,  in  the  vicinity  of  Zorah, 
the  home  of  Samson.  But  this  tradition  can 
scarcely  be  accepted.  For  the  place,  judging  from 
the  connection  of  the  narrative,  cannot  have  been 
remote  from  Gaza  (cf.  ver.  21).  Nay,  even  the  im- 
mediate connection  of  our  narrative  with  the  pre- 
vious occurrence  in  Gaza,  points  to  the  vicinity  of 
the  latter  city.  Moreover,  it  is  to  be  supposed  that 
precisely  in  the  region  indicated  by  Eusebius,  all 


Philistine  supremacy  was  abrogated  by  the  grow- 
ing fear  of  Samson's  activity  as  Judge.  Nor  is  it 
difficult  to  see  that  the  tradition  followed  by  Euse- 
bius, connects  itself  with  the  exegesis  of  ch.  xiii. 
25.  It  will  therefore  be  an  allowable  conjecture, 
to  assume  as  the  theatre  of  the  sad  catastrophe 
which  is  now  related,  the  present  w -etched  village 
Simsira,  whence  the  Wady  (Nachal)  Simsim,  passed 
by  the  traveller  on  the  way  from  Gaza  to  Ashke- 
lon,  where  it  debouches,  derives  its  name  (Ritter, 
xvi.  68).  It  is  remarkable  that  another,  albeit  in 
this  respect  erroneous  tradition,  led  astray  by  the 
name  Askulan,  Ashkelon,  has  identified  this  wady 
with  the  brook  Eshcol,  which  must  indeed  be 
sought  near  Hebron,  but  which  likewise  derived 
its  name  from  the  grapes  of  that  region. 

The  name  of  the  woman  would  not  have  been 
given  by  the  narrator,  had  he  not  wished  to  inti- 
mate the  same  idea  which  R.  Mair  expressed  {Sota, 
9,  2;  Jallcut,  n.  70),1  when  he  remarked,  that  even 
if  Delilah  had  not  been  her  name,  she  might  nev- 
ertheless properly  be  so  called,  because  H7T  v,T 
lillD  j"IS,  "  she  debilitated  his  strength."     The 

form  s~\ TH  (from  Chaldee  vv"T)  has  clearly  also 
given  rise  to  the  name  AaAiS<£,  which  is  given  to 
Delilah  in  the  Septuagint  and  in  many  MSS.  of 
Josephus,  and  which  is  therefore  probably  not  a 
false  reading.  We  meet  also  with  a  Greek  female 
name  Aa\is,  SaXlSos.  The  name  Delilah  reminds 
us  readily  of  the  onomatopoetic  German  word 
ein-lullen  [English,  to  lull  asleep],  Greek  f)avKa.\aai 
(whence  a  proper  name  Baii/caAos).  Sensuality 
sings  and  lulls  the  manly  strength  of  the  hero  to 
sleep.  The  voluptuous  chiefs-  of  the  Philistines 
know  this  full  well,  and  therefore  they  say  : 

Ver.  5.  Persuade  him,  and  see  wherein  his 
great  strength  lieth.  Samson  was  no  giant, 
coarse  and  elephantine,  like  a  Cyclops ;  otherwise, 
they  would  have  been  at  no  loss  to  explain  his 
strength.  The  shoulders  on  which  he  bore  the 
gate-doors  of  Gaza  were  not  sixty  ells  apart,  as  in 
the  figurative  expression  of  the  Talmud.  He  was 
regularly  built,  although  we  may  conceive  of  him 

1  Cf.  Bamidbar  Rabba,  §  9,  p.  194  b. 

2  Q^HD,  ^~lp  :  probably  etymologically  connect*! 
with  the  Greek    ipaw-os.     The  Targum  translates  "*2™]*1T0. 


216 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


as  tall  and  stately ;  full  of  spirit,  vet  good-natured 
and  kind,  as  the  possessor  of  true  divine  genius 
always  is. 

But  on  this  very  account,  because  physically  he 
did  seem  very  different  from  themselves,  and  as 
they  knew  not  the  power  of  divine  inspiration, 
they  entertained  the  wide-spread  superstition,  still 
current  in  the  East,  that  he  had  some  occult  means 
at  his  service,  from  which  he  derived  his  unusual 
strength.  The  expressions  for  amulets  and  charms 
for  such  and  similar  purposes,  are  still  very  numer- 
ous in  the  Persian  and  Arabic  idioms.  Rustem, 
according  to  the  Iranian  legend,  could  not  have 
overcome  Isfendiar,  if  he  had  not  previously  learned 
the  charm  which  gave  the  latter  his  strength. 
Scandinavian  mythology,  also,  puts  Thor  in  pos- 
session of  his  highest  strength,  only  when  he  puts 
on  the  girdle  which  assures  it  to  him.  Even  in 
Germany,  the  superstition  was  prevalent  until  com- 
paratively recent  times,  that  persons  had  some- 
times become  "  fearfully  strong  "  through  the  use 
of  demoniac  flesh  (Meier,  Schivdb.  Sagen,  p.  111). 
In  the  year  1718  a  person  confessed  that  the 
devil  had  given  him  a  receipt,  in  the  possession  of 
which  he  felt  himself  stronger  than  all  other  men 
(cf.  Tharsander,  Schaupfatz  unger.  Meinungen,  ii. 
514  f.). 

It  was  all  important  for  the  Philistines  to  learn 
Samson's  charm,  in  order  to  render  it  powerless. 
They  hear  of  his  love  for  Delilah.  They  were 
aware  that  before  this  the  hero  had  failed  to  with- 
stand the  cajoleries  of  the  woman  he  loved.  In 
both  earlier  and  later  times,  the  orientals  were 
conversant  with  the  dangers  which  often  arise  to 
even  the  greatest  heroes  and  kings,  from  their 
weakness  toward  women.  Tradition  and  poetry 
are  full  of  it.  In  the  apocryphal  Esdras  (I.  cli. 
iv.  26  f. )  we  read  :  "  Many  have  gone  out  of  their 
wits  for  women,  and  have  become  slaves  on  ac- 
count of  them.  Many  have  perished,  and  erred, 
and  sinned,  by  reason  of  women."  And  the  Turk- 
ish poet  Hamdi  says :  "  Brother,  if  thou  comest  to 
women,  do  not  trust  them.  Women  have  deceived 
even  prophets."  Though  this  be  true,  all  women 
are  not  thereby  defamed.  Traitors  like  Delilah 
are  only  those  who  are  such  as  she  was,  just 
as  the  only  lovers  of  treason  are  cowardly  men, 
like  the  Philistines,  who  dare  not  meet  greatness 
openly. 

And  we  will  give  thee  eleven  hundred  pieces 
of  silver  each.  It  is  a  very  mean  trade  that  is 
here  driven  with  the  affections  of  Samson.  It  is 
an  instance  so  deterrent,  that  it  might  well  move 
deeply  and  instruct  both  young  and  old.  The 
woman  of  Timnah  betrayed  Samson  either  from 
fear  or  from  Philistine  zeal :  this  one  sells  him  for 
money  ;  and  the  Philistines  with  whom  she  trades 
are  very  careful  in  making  their  promises.  It  is 
not  enough,  they  stipulate,  that  she  ascertains  the 
secret ;  it  must  be  such  that  use  can  be  made  of  it, 
and  that  with  the  particular  specified  result.  This 
carefulness  shows  that  the  cold-blooded  Philistines 
knew  with  whom  tiny  had  to  do.  So  much  the 
sadder  is  i :  to  see  Samson  lavish  caresses  on  such 
a  woman.     The  sum  for  which  Delilah  consents 

1  The   Targum   speaks   of  1.100  silver  sitin    Cj^V^D. 

from  J  D),  On  the  rotation  of  the  sela  to  the  shekel, 
sf  my  "JHrtitche  Qesehiehtet"  in  Ersch  and  Grubers  Enry- 
k'.'pulit,  p.  3*1 

-    Compare  Jos.,  Am.  v.  8,  11  —  Tr.] 

*  TDr.  Caaael  assumes  all  through  the  present  disoossloii 
tfeftt  Delflab  WM  a  Philistine  woman.  He  is  probably  cor- 
»•<,  cf.  Smith's  Bibit  Diet-,  art.  "Delilah."      Wordsworth, 


to  sell  the  hero  is  not  insignificant.  Since  each 
of  the  princes  promises  1,100  shekels  of  silver,  and 
since,  according  to  Judg.  iii.  3,  the  number  of 
princes  may  be  set  down  as  five,  the  sum  pledged 
amounted  to  5,500  shekels,  between  +.500  and  5,000 
[Prussian]  Reichsthaler  [i.  p.,  between  3,000  and 
3,500  dollars].1 — Had  Curins,  the  Roman,  been 
less  niggardly  towards  Fulvia,  his  scortmn,  the 
Catilinian  conspiracy  might  perhaps  have  been 
more  successful  (Sallust,  Catilino,  23). 

Vers.  6-9.  If  they  bind  me  with  seven  fresh 
cords.  Delilah  accepts  the  offers  held  out  by 
treason,  and  begins  to  insinuate  herself  into  Sam- 
son's favor2  by  inquiries  about  his  strength.  But 
Samson  does  not  tell  her  the  truth.  Why  not  1 
Because  from  that  moment  he  would  have  beer 
obliged  to  have  nothing  more  to  do  with  her.  Fo. 
her  questions  reminded  him  of  the  divine  origii. 
of  his  strength,  which  was  not  given  for  such  « 
house,  and  which  after  a  true  answer  could  no 
longer  be  secure  there.  As  soon  as  he  told  the 
truth,  he  must  either  depart  or  perish,  separate 
from  his  charmer  or  suffer.  The  mediaeval  poetry 
in  which  heroes  of  superior  origin  live  peaceably 
with  women,  but  are  obliged  to  separate  from 
them  as  soon  as  these  begin  to  inquire  after  their 
descent,  represents  the  same  thought  in  poetical 
garb.  The  wife's  questions,  however,  in  these  fic- 
tions, are  not  put  with  treasonable  intent.  They 
nevertheless  drive  the  man  away  (cf.  my  work : 
Der  Schwan,  p.  21,  etc.). 

Want  of  confidence  and  national  fellowship3  do 
not  permit  Samson  to  give  the  true  answer  to 
Delilah.  But  if  these  be  wanting,  how  can  he 
consort  with  her,  even  leaving  her  questions  out 
of  view  ?  That  this  is  not  impossible,  is  but  too 
plain;  but  the  explanation  of  it  is  unpleasing. 
Samson,  in  his  sensual  sports,  lays  no  claims  to 
morality,  and  the  heroism,  in  which  he  feels  him- 
self secure,  sleeps  under  the  pleasing  sensations 
of  the  piav.  He  would  continue  to  divert  himself, 
and  therefore  prefers  not  to  tell  the  truth.  In  the 
"  seven  cords,"  however,  he  already  hints  at  the 
"  seven  locks  "  of  his  head.  Here  is  the  germ  of 
his  fall.  He  seeks  to  quiet  Delilah  by  some  sort 
of  answer.  Seven  cords  of  animal  tendons,  not 
yet  stretched  (cf.  Saalschutz,  Archaologie,  i.  141, 
note  8),  are  undoubtedly  sufficient  to  render  a 
strong  man  incapable  of  defending  himself.  It 
was  an  answer  which  Delilah  might  reasonably 
believe,  while  for  himself  it  contained  no  danger ; 
for  who  will  put  the  cords  on  him,  except  by  his 
own  permission  ?  Even  when  at  a  subsequent  visit 
Delilah  had  the  cords  in  readiness,  and  coaxed  him 
to  allow  her  to  bind  him  with  them,  he  could  still 
consent  to  be  passive.  Had  the  Philistines  ac- 
tually attacked  him,  it  would  but  have  afforded 
him  a  desirable  opportunity  for  an  heroic  feat. 
But  the  Philistines  are  careful,  and  keep  at  a  dis- 
tance until  they  see  how  the  tiinl  will  end.  When 
Delilah  raises  the  cry  of  Philistines,  Samson  rends 
the  cords  asunder  as  so  many  threads  of  tow.  He 
gave  a  proof  ot  his  strength,  but  gained  no  vic- 
tory. 

however,  who  regards  her  as  "a  light,  venal  woman  of 
Samson's  own  tribe,"  makes  a  suggestion  worthy  of  coneioV 
eration  on  the  other  side.  "  Hence."  he  says  (namely,  she 
being  au  Israelitess),  '*  she  professed  love  for  Samson,  when 
she  said,  'The  Philistines"  (mine  enemies  as  well  as  thinel 
'are  upon  thee,  Samson.'  He  was  the  more  easily  caught 
in  the  snare  because  he  could  not  Imagine  that  a  woma* 
of  Israel  would  betray  him."  —  Tr.] 


CHAPTER   XVI.  4-2H. 


217 


Th»t  which  the  principle  of  evil  here  attempts 
agains  lie  hero,  Scandinavian  mythology,  in  the 
Edda,  represents  inversely.  The  "Ases"  (demi- 
gods) are  afraid  of  the  ■'  Wolf"  (the  representative 
of  evil).  They  persuade  him  to  allow  himself  to 
he  hound,  in  order  to  show  his  strength.  He  tears 
asunder  one  chain  after  another,  until  he  is  bound 
by  means  of  a  singular  cord,  whose  symbolical 
sense  makes  it  the  same  as  that  under  which  Sam- 
son succumbs :  for  it  is  the  cord  of  sensuality.  —  It 
is  a  distorted  form  of  our  narrative  which  we  find 
in  the  Slavic  story  of  the  strong  son,  who  rends 
the  rope  in  pieces,  but  succumbs  under  the  thin 
string,  which  cuts  into  his  flesh. 

Vers.  10-12.  If  they  bind  me  with  new  ropes 
with  which  no  work  was  ever  done.  Samson's 
contempt  of  the  Philistines  is  so  great,  that  he 
docs  not  even  become  angry  with  Delilah,  whose 
behavior  nevertheless  could  not  but  appear  sus- 
picious to  him.  And  she  knows  her  power  over 
him  so  well,  that,  after  the  ancient  manner  of 
women,  she  seeks  to  escape  the  reproaches  which 
lie  might  be  expected  to  make  against  her,  by  an- 
ticipating them  with  her  own  against  him.  And 
that  with  all  the  brazen  effrontery  characteristic 
of  women  whose  charms  are  great  and  whose 
hearts  are  bad.  "  I  saw  Apanie,"  it  is  said  in  the 
apocryphal  Esdras  (I.  ch.  iv.  29  (f.),  "  taking  the 
crown  from  the  king's  head,  and  striking  him.  If 
she  laughs  upon  him,  he  laughs ;  if  she  is  angry 
at  him,  he  natters  her,  that  she  may  be  reconciled 
to  him."  Delilah,  with  treason  in  her  heart,  dares 
to  tax  Samson  with  falsehood.  But  she  uses  this 
feigned  sensitiveness  and  her  crocodile  tears  to 
renew  her  attempts  to  gain  his  secret  and  her  re- 
ward. Still  he  does  not  tell  her  the  truth ;  but 
yet  she  makes  an  advance  towards  her  end.  It 
could  not  be  otherwise.  For  although  Samson's 
greatness  only  jests,  it  is  nevertheless  true  that  his 
godlike  strength  was  not  given  for  sport.  The 
playfully  received  reproach  that  he  had  told  her 
lies,  drives  him  involuntarily  a  step  nearer  the 
truth  which  her  demand  profanes.  Satan  already 
draws  his  snares  one  stitch  closer.  For  when  he 
tells  her  that  he  can  be  bound  by  new  cords  "  with 
which  no  work  has  been  done,"  the  added  qualifi- 
cation is  not  an  empty  and  meaningless  one.  He 
was  already  once  bound  with  "  new  cords  "  (ch. 
xv.  13),  and  set  himself  free.  But  the  cords  "  with 
which  no  work  has  yet  been  done,"  are  an  image 
of  his  strength  ;  the  hair  of  his  head  also  is  un- 
profaned  —  no  razor  has  ever  touched  it.  Strength 
and  consecration  were  characteristic  of  the  things 
yet  uncontaminated  by  the  uses  and  defilements 
of  life.  The  vehicle  on  which  the  ark  of  God  is 
transported  must  be  drawn  by  animals  never  be- 
fore yoked,  and  must  itself  be  new.  The  Philis- 
tine diviners  (1  Sam.  vi.  7)  know  this;  the  law  of 
Israel  also  recognizes  the  principle,  in  its  require 
ment  that  the  red  heifer  of'purirication  shall  be 
one  upon  whom  yoke  never  came1  (Num.  xix.  2). 
Availing  himself  of  this  belief,  Samson  speaks  of 
"  new  cords,  which  have  never  done  service,"  in 
order  by  this  suggestion  of  special  strength  in 
them,  to  make  his  answer  more  credible,  while  it 
U  the  same  time  gives  a  reflection  of  the  truth 
with  regard  to  himself. 

But  the  treason  does  not  yet  succeed.  The 
Philistine    spy,    who    is    present    hut    concealed 

Pl|-7?>  in   the  inner   apartment),  must  for  the 

1  Mediaeval  superstition  reproduces  this  also.  Clothe  are 
required  for  alchemistie  purpo-es  which  have  been  finished 
>y  "  undented  persons  " 


second  time  depart,  disappointed  and  gloomy.  Th« 
cords  fall  from  his  arms  like  threads.  It  was  foi 
him  but  a  pleasant  pastime  thus  to  give  Delilah 
one  more  proof  of  his  strength,  ho]  ing  perhaps  tc 
deter  her  from  further  questioning.  If  he  did  believe 
this,  it  could  only  be  in  consequence  of  his  mag- 
nificent confidence,  which  in  the  consciousness  of 
strength  verged  toward  weakness.  But  natures 
like  Delilah's  do  not  relax:  avarice  and  vexation 
urge  them  on.  In  the  Old-French  romance  of 
Merlin,  that  wise  man  says  that  such  women  are, 
"  hwnecons  a  prendre  poissons  en  riviere,  reths  a 
prendre  les  oisetiulx  it  lu  jn'pe'e,  rasouers  trunchins  el 
affilez." 

Vers.  13,  14.  If  thou  weavest  the  seven  locks 
of  my  head  into  the  web.  He  still  conceals  the 
truth  ;  but  also  once  more  yields  a  step.  The  un- 
truth constantly  diminishes,  the  danger  constantly 
increases.  He  thinks  no  longer  of  actual  ropes ; 
he  speaks  already  of  the  locks  of  his  head.  For- 
merly, he  hinted  at  them,  under  the  figure  of  that 
which  is  untouched  of  labor,  but  named  cords ; 
now  he  names  his  hair,  but  does  not  yet  speak  of 
its  untouched  consecration.  So  organically  does 
his  own  noble  nature  press  him  onward  into  the 
snares  set  for  him  by  the  reproaches  and  tears  of 
the  traitoress.  As  soon  as  he  determined  either  to 
tell  the  truth,  or  not  to  tell  it,  he  must  break  with 
the  traitorous  tempter,  and  part  from  her  ;  and  if 
he  does  not  do  this,  it  is  precisely  his  ordinary, 
noble  impulse  toward  truth,  which  even  in  jest  and 
in  the  face  of  treason  he  cannot  deny,  that  drives 
him  on  to  destruction. 

Expositors  find  the  answer  of  Samson  very  diffi- 
cult to  be  understood,  but  needlessly.  Delilah  had 
in  her  apartment  a  weaver's  loom,  at  which  she 
worked.  It  was  doubtless  of  the  upright,  prim- 
itive form.  It  is  probable  that  the  technical  terms 
connected  with  the  weaver's  art  in  Egypt  were  also 
prevalent  on  the  Phoenician  coast.  Weaving  wo- 
men have  also  been  found  depicted  on  Egyptian 

monuments.  The  word  i~l3BJ2  signifies  the  web 
on  the  loom.  Hesychius  (cf.  Schleusner,  Thes.  iii. 
529)  has  a  form  .uMownr,  which  is  explained  to 
mean  "  weaver's-beam."  It  is  then  added  :  "  Some 
make  it  mean  amtov,  others  fitadicruiv."  The  lat- 
ter word  is  manifestly  j"13SD,  and  the  same  as 
fifffdvruii/,  which  only  the  LXX.  know",  and  is  cer- 
tainly not  Greek,  although  avriop  occurs  elsewhere. 

The  Targum  represents  it  by  Srr^l27£,  which  is 
evidently  derived  from  the  same  technical  expres- 
sion. Delilah  is  to  work  the  hair  of  Samson,  who 
places  himself  near  the  loom,  into  her  web  as 
woof.  This  could  only  be  done  from  above.  He- 
rodotus (ii.  35)  informs  us,  that  the  Egyptians, 
unlike  other  nations,  inserted  the  woof,  not  from 
below  upward,  but  from  above  downward.  Sam- 
sou's  locks  were  long  enough  to  form  a  close  and 
perfect  web ;  for  it  is  added  that  she  also  struck  in 

the  "tOyi  the  batten,  in  order  to  show  that  it  was 

a  regular  piece  of  weaving.  "W^  is  what  Homer 
calls  the  xepKis,  staff,  equivalent  to  our  "batten." 
The  Greek  Kep«t's,  also,  means  a  pin,  nail,  just  as 

the  Hebrew  "T^  does  elsewhere.  During  the 
weaving,  Samson  had  fallen  asleep.  Had  he  been 
unable  to  extricate  his  hair,  he  would  at  least  have 
been  unfree  in  his  movements.  But  at  the  cry 
"  Philistines  !  "  he  awakes.  He  gives  one  wrench, 
and  the  web  tears,  the  batten  shoots  out,  and  the 

seven  locks  are  free.     They  are  called  niD^nO 


218 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


a  word  found  only  here.  It  comes  from  H  .^> 
not,  however,  from  that  which  means  '■  to  change," 
out  from  the  equivalent  of  Tr\ctca,  with  which,  con- 
Bonant   changes   being  taken   into   account,  it  is 

identical  l^bn  =  Itbs  =  "[bs  =  TrXcKu).  The 
TrAoKauoL,  locks,  are  seven,  iu  accordance  with  the 
sacred  number  of  perfection  and  consecration.  De- 
lilah finds  herself  deceived  for  the  third  time.  The 
Philistines  become  impatient  and  dubious.  No 
mention  is  made  this  third  time  of  a  spy,  awaiting 
the  issue  of  the  trial.  Even  the  second  time,  it  is 
not  stated,  as  at  the  first  attempt,  that  the  Philis- 
tines brought  her  the  cords.  The  woman  sees  her- 
self defrauded  of  her  largfc  gains,  and  turned  into 
a  laughing-stock  besides.  She  therefore  brings 
everything  to  bear  to  overcome  the  hero.  She 
employs  all  her  arts  to  torment  him.  He  does  not 
love  her  —  has  no  heart  for  her  —  has  deceived 
her :  such  is  the  gamut  on  which  her  tears  and 
prayers  are  pitched.  In  point  of  fact,  the  three- 
fold reproach  is  a  threefold  injustice.  The  three 
answers  he  has  given,  looked  at  carefully,  form  as 
it  were  an  enigma,  in  which  the  truth  lies  con- 
cealed :  in  the  first,  the  "  seven  ; "  in  the  second, 
the  "  consecration  ;  "  in  the  third,  the  "  locks." 
He  is  really  too  great  to  lie;  and  therefore  he  falls 
a  victim.  Had  he  only  lied  thoroughly,  lied  once 
more,  he  had  been  free.  The  Philistines  would 
not  have  returned  ;  Delilah  would  have  ceased. 
But  Samson's  history  is  a  finished  tragedy.  He 
falls  by  reason  of  his  greatness,  which  hinders  him 
from  avoiding  the  thrust  of  the  serpent  whom  he 
has  once  suffered  to  approach  his  heel. 

Samson's  pliableness  has  met  with  sufficiently 
frivolous  apprehension.  "  Strong  Samson,"  says 
Rousseau  (Emile,  ed.  1782,  iii.  p.  200),  "was  not 
60  strong  as  Delilah."  This  is  erroneous.  It  was 
because  he  was  so  strong  and  Delilah  so  weak, 
that  he  fell.  He  stumbled  over  an  opponent  who 
was  too  little  to  contend  with.  Rousseau  com- 
pares him  with  Hercules  in  his  relations  to  Om- 
phale.  This  also  is  incorrect.  That  myth  is 
nothing  but  a  representation  of  the  sun,  who  as 
hero  descends  into  the  lap  of  repose.  It  has  no 
dramatico-historieal  interest.  Omphale  makes  no 
demand  of  anything  with  which  the  prosperity 
and  freedom  of  a  nation  are  connected.  Nor  is  it 
more  correct  to  look  for  analogies  among  the 
tasks  which,  in  tradition  and  poetry,  are  imposed 
on  lover-heroes  by  their  mistresses.  Those  are  mere 
trials  of  strength,  without  moral  character.  The 
historian  of  the  Incas  says,  panegyrically,  of  Hu- 
ayna  Capac,  one  of  the  last  monarchs  of  Peru 
(died  1525),  that  "he  was  never  known  to  refuse 
a  woman,  of  whatever  age  or  degree  she  might  be, 
any  favor  that  she  asked  of  him"  (Prescott,  Peru, 
i.  339,  note).  Samson  had  certainly  refused  Deli- 
lah, had  he  not  been  so  great  in  his  strength,  so 
unique  in  his  manifestation,  so  elevated  above  his 
time,  so  true  even  in  evasion,  so  earnest  in  sport. 
The  weakness  of  Pericles  for  Aspasia,  even  if  not 
without  influence  on  affairs  of  state,  was  not  dra- 
matic—  for  they  mutually  valued  each  other;  but 
Samson's  love  is  tragic,  because  the  play  in  which 
in  his  greatness  he  indulges,  causes  his  feet  to  slide 
on  account  of  it. 

1  "^V**  occurs  only  here  ;  cf.  aAyos,  aXyvvto.     Similar  is 

1"blS.  hunger. 
'  t   : 

2  Id  the  Middle  Ages  it  was  believed  that  she  had  stupi- 
fled  him  by  means  of  opium.  This  view  transmitted  itself 
•  two  into  the  "  Chronicon  Engelhusii,"  in  Leibnitz,  Script. 


Vers.  15,  16.  And  his  soul  was  vexed  unto 
death.  If  Samson  remained,  he  must  succumb. 
The  national  hero  of  Israel  who  cannot  separate 
himself  from  a  Philistine  woman,  must  fall.  In 
vain  has  he  sought  three  times  to  put  her  off  with 
a  jest.  The  avarice  and  knavery  of  such  women 
are  not  to  be  escaped  from  by  witty  turns.  She 
knows  that  at  last  he  cannot  hide  the  truth  from 
her.  Precisely  his  greatness  and  fearlessness  ena- 
ble her  to  compass  his  destruction.  He  remains  ; 
and  she  does  not  cease  her  efforts,  until  at  last  he 

is  wearied  of  her  ceaseless  tearing  (r"^?5^iT'])' 

She  bored  him  to  death  (itt?9j  ~I?|?J?!!)  with  tears 
and  reproaches.  He  wished  to  have  rest  —  and  to 
remain  ;  nothing  was  left,  therefore,  but  to  grant 
her  wish.  Such  is  the  philosophy  of  many  hus- 
bands who  yield  to  women  ambitious  of  rule.  To 
be  sure,  they  are  their  wives,  before  God  and  men, 
and  the  danger  is  not  always  so  great  as  here. 
Samson,  although  he  remains,  finds  himself  so 
plagued,  that  in  order  to  quiet  Delilah,  everything 
else  is  indifferent  to  him.  He  determines  to  tell 
her  the  true  reason  of  his  great  strength.  But 
will  she  not  wish  to  test  the  truth  of  what  he  tells 
her  ?  and  will  he  not  thereby  lose  his  strength  ? 
He  considers  it  not.  But  this  strength  which  ha 
puts  in  jeopardy,  it  is  not  his  own  possession  ? 
He  does  not  reflect.  It  was  given  him  for  the 
freedom  of  his  people  against  the  Philistines.  But 
he  will  tell  her  the  truth,  come  what  may,  in  order 
to  have  peace.  Delilah  had  doubtless  promised 
him  not  to  abuse  his  secret.  He  believes  her 
promise,  if  only  he  can  silence  her.  He  was 
wearied  to  death,  so  that  his  courage,  the  freshness 
of  his  mind,  and  his  passion  for  victory  were  be- 
numbed— and  all  that,  when  one  step  out  of  her 
house  would  have  set  him  free  !  Abstinence  un- 
folded his  strength :  Delilah  in  the  Wine- Valley 
(Nachal  Sorek)  put  it  to  sleep.2  When  he  killed 
lions,  he  was  full  of  happiness  and  relish  for  life  : 
now,  he  is  wearied  unto  death.  In  Timnah,  his 
wife  betrays  him,  and  affords  him  an  opportunity 
for  a  glorious  victory :  now,  he  betrays  himself, 
and  falls. 

Ver.  17.  If  I  be  shaven,  then  my  strength 
will  go  from  me.  Expositors,  from  the  earliest 
ages  down,  have  here  made  mention  of  the  Greek 
myth  of  king  Nisus  of  Megara,  and  have  even 
regarded  it  as  a  disfigurement  of  what  is  stated 
here.  But  on  closer  inspection  of  the  sources 
whence  we  derive  our  knowledge  of  the  Greek 
myth,  the  greater  part  of  the  analogy  which  it 
seems  to  offer  with  our  narrative  falls  away,  and 
the  idea  from  which  it  springs  is  seen  to  be  very 
different.  It  is  nowhere  stated  that  Nisus  would 
lose  his  dominion  if  his  hair  were  shaved  off;  but 
only  that  on  his  gray  head  there  grew  a  single  pur- 
ple hair,  with  which  his  fortune  was  connected 
(Apollod.  XV.  2:  ?rop<pupe'ai>  eV  fjito-ri  rij  Kt<pa\r} 
rpixa  ;  cf.  Ovid,  Met  am.  viii.  8  :  "  Splendidus  (cri- 
nis)  ostro  inter  honoratos  medio  de  vertice  canos.")3 
It  is  true  that  his  daughter  betrayed  him  ;  but  that 
was  not  his  fault.  Not  he,  but  his  daughter,  was 
blinded  by  sensual  love  for  the  enemy.  The  prin- 
cipal idea,  the  weakness  of  Samson  himself,  is 
wholly  unrepresented.     Why  only  the  purple  hair 

Rer.  Bnuuvie.  lltiistr.  Insert',  ii.  989  :  (t  Samson  opio  po- 
talus,'  etc. 

8  Cf.  Hyginus,  Fab.  198  :  purpureum  crinem.  Virgil,  Ct'ru, 
ver.  121 :  Candida  cepsaries  .  .  .  .  et  roseus  medio  fulgltM 
verlict  crinis.  The  ff  golden  hairs'*  of  Schwa  re  (Vrspr.  d* 
Mythol.  p.  144)  are  therefore  to  be  corrected  as  also  Btf 
'beau's  "'  protecting  hair." 


CHAPTER  XVI.    4-20. 


219 


contained  this  Jiduria  magni  regni,  we  are  not  in- 
formed. But  it  must  probably  be  explained  by 
the  assumption  of  some  connection  with  the  pur- 
ple light  of  the  Sun,  and  the  vast  knowledge  which 
that  deity  was  supposed  to  possess  —  thus  making 
it  a  pledge  of  wisdom  rather  than  strength ;  for 
Nisus  was  no  Hercules.  This  view  is  corroborated 
by  the  different  turn  given  to  the  idea  in  popular 
traditions.  For  just  as  Christianity  portrayed  the 
devil  as  one  who  arrogates  the  power  and  appear- 
ance of  the  light,  and  presents  himself  as  an 
angel  of  light,  so  popular  conceptions  have  rep- 
resented him  with  a  cock's  feather,  as  the  sym- 
bol of  light,  and  from  a  kindred  point  of  view, 
have  invented  the  charm  of  "golden  devil's-hairs  " 
to  attain  to  universal  knowledge  (cf.  my  Eddischen 
Studien,  p.  86).  In  all  this  there  is  no  resemblance 
to  the  life-like,  historical  picture  here  drawn  of 
Samson.  Still,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  Bibli- 
cal narrative  has  apparently  furnished  the  basis 
of  many  superstitious  distortions,  however  coarse 
most  of  them  may  be.  Among  these  the  case  of 
Apollonius  of  Tyana,  whom  Donvitian  caused  to 
be  shaved,  is  not  to  be  reckoned,  however;  for 
that  was  probably  only  designed  to  inflict  dis- 
honor. But  it  is  not  delusive  to  find  one  of  them 
in  the  opinion  that  magicians  and  witches  were 
insensible  to  torture,  until  the  hair  had  been  shaven 
from  the  whole  bodv  —  an  opinion  which  led  to 
many  detestable  proceedings,  but  was  also  speedily 
condemned  by  many  (cf.  Martin  Delrio,  Disquis. 
Magical,  lib.  v.  §  9,  pp.  764  f.,  ed.  Coin.  1679  ; 
Paulini  (1709),  Pkilosoph.  Luststunden,  ii.  169; 
Schedius,  De  Diis  Germanis  (1728),  p.  388). 

Ver.  18.  And  Delilah  saw  that  he  had  told 
her  all  his  heart.  Old  Jewish  expositors  say 
that  she  knew  this  because  "  words  of  truth  are 
readily  recognizable,"  and  because  she  felt  sure 
that  he  would  not  "  take  the  name  of  God  in 
vain."  She  followed  up  her  discovery  with  pro- 
ceedings sufficiently  satanical.  She  at  once  sent 
to  the  Philistine  chiefs  to  request  them  to  visit  her 
once  more.  This  time  he  had  undoubtedly  opened 
his  heart  to  her.  She  did  not.  however,  intoxicate 
him,  and  proceed  to  her  work,  before  they  came. 
They  must  first  bring  the  money  with  them.  As 
for  them,  they  soon  made  their  appearance,  and, 
concealed  from  Samson,  awaited  her  call. 

Ver.  19.  And  his  strength  went  from  him. 
As  soon  as  the  seven  locks  of  his  head  had  fallen, 
he  ceased  to  possess  the  superhuman  strength 
which  had  hitherto  resided  in  him.  But  in  the 
beginning  of  his  history,  in  the  annunciation  of 
his  birth  and  character  to  his  parents,  it  is  not  in- 
timated that  by  reason  of  the  hair  which  no  razor 
was  to  touch,  he  should  possess  such  strength. 
Nor  is  it  anywhere  mentioned  that  Samson,  the 
child,  was  already  in  possession  of  this  giant 
strength,  as  soon  as  his  hair  had  grown  long.  On 
the  contrary,  it  is  said,  "And  Jehovah  blessed 
nim."  Had  it  been  his  long  hair  that  made  him 
so  strong,  there  would  have  been  no  necessity  for 
the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  to  "  come  upon  him,"  when 
he  was  about  to  perform  some  great  deed  for 
which  the  occasion  presented  itself.  What  sort  of 
strength  his  long  locks,  as  such,  could  give  him, 
is  clearly  seen  when  nothing  but  God's  intervening 
help  saves  him  from  perishing  through  thirst. 
The  growth  of  the  unshaven  hair  on  the  head  of 
a  Nazarite,  was  only  a  token  of  his  consecration, 

i  Such  is  also  the  Roman  Catholic  representation  found 
to  Bergier.  Diet.  Theo/ogiqtie,  p.  635  :  ft  La  conservation  de 
*i  cktveux  ctatt  la  condition  de  ce  privilege  comme  la  marque 


not  the  consecration  itself.  Similarly,  the  seven 
locks  of  Samson  were  only  the  sign  of  his  strength, 
not  the  strength  itself.1  The  strength  of  Samsoi* 
depended,  not  on  the  external  locks,  but  on  thi 
consecration  of  which  they  wete  the  symbol. 
Hence,  be  needed  God's  help  and  Spirit,  and  re- 
ceived his  strength  not  because  of  his  long  hair, 
but  because  of  his  vocation.1  For  God's  nearness 
is  granted  not  to  all  whose  hair  is  long,  but  only 
to  those  devoted  to  his  service.  But  just  as  in 
Israel  he  ceased  to  be  a  Nazarite  who  shaved  his 
hair,  so  Samson's  consecration  departed  from  him 
when  he  removed  its  sign.  When  he  failed  to 
withstand  Delilah,  he  surrendered  not  so  much 
his  hair,  as  his  divine  consecration.  He  denies 
his  election  to  be  a  "  Nazir  of  God,"  when  he 
gives  his  hair  to  profanation.  His  consecration 
was  broken,  for  he  voluntarily  allowed  it  to  be 
profaned  by  the  hands  of  the  Philistine  woman  ; 
his  courage  was  broken,  for  he  had  done  what  he 
would  not  do ;  his  joyousness  was  broken,  when 
he  yielded  with  half  his  heart,  wearied,  and  in 
conflict  with  himself;  his  conscience  was  broken, 
and  would  not  be  drowned  in  the  intoxication  of 
Sorek-grapes ;  his  manhood  is  broken,  for  he  is  no 
longer  a  whole  man  who,  in  a  waking  dream,  be- 
trays  the  sanctuary  and  glory  of  his  life  to  the 
enemy :  in  a  word,  his  strength  is  broken ;  and 
of  all  this,  his  fallen  locks  are  not  the  cause,  but 
the  sign.  The  departure  of  his  strength  is  not 
an  externally  caused,  but  an  inwardly  grounded 
moral  result'.  Virgil  says  (^Eneid,  iv.  705)  that 
the  real  life  flame  (color)  of  the  deceased  Dido 
ceased  to  exist  only  with  the  severing  of  the  hair 
from  her  head.  This  idea,  raised  into  the  sphere 
of  moral  truth,  applies  to  Samson.  His  long  hair 
was  no  amulet,  conditioning  the  enjoyment  of  the 
Spirit  of  God  —  for  without  it  the  Spirit  rested 
on  Gideon  and  Jephthah,  filling  them  with  heroic 
virtue ;  but  when,  with  a  restless  heart,  he  con- 
sciously threw  himself  and  his  people,  for  wine  and 
love,  into  the  power  of  the  harlot,  he  became  a 
broken  hero.  Since  he  himself  says,  and  fully  be- 
lieves, that  his  strength  is  in  his  hair,  and  never- 
theless gives  himself  up,  it  is  evident  that  a  breach 
has  opened  between  his  passions  and  his  reason ; 
and  this  breach  made  him  a  broken  man.  This 
moral  rupture  distinguishes  Samson's  fall  from 
similar  histories.  The  legend  concerning  Sheikh 
Shehabeddin,  in  the  "  Forty  Viziers  "  (ed.  Behr- 
nauer,  p.  25)  is  in  many  respects  shaped  after  the 
catastrophe  of  Samson  ;  but  the  arts  by  which  he 
escapes  from  the  Sultan  who  persecutes  him,  are 
those  of  magic.  When  a  woman  finally  persuades 
him  to  betray  his  secret,  it  turns  out  that  it  con- 
sists only  in  certain  external  washings.  AH  moral 
interest  "is  wanting,  both  in  the  attack  and  in  the 
defense.  The  Siegfried  legend  in  the  Nibelungen 
is  more  beautiful.  The  wounded  part  of  the  hero 
is  also  entirely  external ;  but  its  betrayal  is  wrought 
by  love,  not  by  malice.  Chriemhild,  from  love  to 
her  husband,  becomes  the  discloser  of  his  weak- 
ness, which  a  man  betrays.  In  Slavic  (cf.  Wenzig, 
p.  190)  and  North  German  legends  (cf.  Mullenhoff, 
p.  406)  magicians  and  strong  persons  do  not  carry 
their  hearts  about  with  them,  but  keep  them  won 
derfully  concealed.  It  is  only  by  women's  arts  that 
opponents  ascertain  where  it  is.  The  primitive, 
moral  ideas  contained  in  these  legends,  are  disfig- 
ured under  the  wrappings  of  childish  distortions. 

de  son  nazartat,  tnais  nullemcnt  la  cause  de  sa  font  su* 
naturelle." 

2  Cf.  Bamidbar  Rabba,  §  14.  p.  214  d. 


220 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


Ver.  20.  And  she  said,  The  Philistines  are 
upon  thee !  In  previous  trials,  cords  and  weaver's 
loom  had  shown  Delilah  and  her  confederates  the 
jnimpaired  condition  of  Samson's  strength.  This 
time,  rendered  confident  by  Delilah's  word,  the 
Philistine  chiefs  are  themselves  present.  Samson 
rises,  reeling,  from  sleep,  sees  the  thick  crowd,  and, 
thinking  that  everything  is  as  formerly,  says :  "  I 
will  go  out  to  battle  as  at  other  times  !  "  He  suits 
the  action  to  the  word  —  but  — 

He  wrist  not  that  Jehovah  was  departed  from 
linn.  Appropriately  does  the  narrator  substitute 
"  Jehovah  "  here  for  "  strength,"  thus  confirming 
what  has  been  remarked  above.  The  Spirit  of 
strength,  consecration  to  God,  integrity  of  soul, 
the  fullness  of  enthusiasm,  the  joyousness  of  the  un- 
broken heart,  were  no  longer  his.  This  is  already 
apparent  from  the  fact  that  he  did  not  know  that 
God  had  left  him.  Whoever  has  God,  knows  it ; 
whomsoever  He  has  left,  knows  it  not.  When  he 
was  near  his  end,  he  could  pray  ;  but  now,  in  his 
6tate  of  semi-intoxication  and  intellectual  obscura- 
tion, he  can  neither  fight  as  formerly,  nor  call  on 
God,  and  so  —  he  falls. 


HOMILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

Samson  was  a  Nazarite.  He  bore  the  sign  of 
the  general  priesthood.  The  consecration  of  God 
was  upon  his  head.  It  fired  his  will,  gave  his 
strength,  and  guided  his  error  into  the  way  of 
salvation.  But  when  he  profaned  it,  and  in  weak- 
ness allowed  Delilah's  unholy  hand  to  touch  it,  he 
lost  both  strength  and  victory.  God  left  him,  be- 
cause he  held  the  honor  of  his  God  cheaper  than 
his  own  pleasures.  Because  he  gave  up  that  which 
he  knew  was  not  his  own,  God  left  him  in  dis- 
honor to  find  his  way  to  penitence.  He  who  could 
not  withstand  the  allurements  of  a  woman,  even 
when  they  demanded  the  surrender  of  his  voca- 
tion, was  not  worthy  any  more  to  withstand  the 
enemy.  His  eyes,  blinded  by  sensuality,  saw  not 
the  treason  :  soon,  blinded  by  the  enemy,  he  should 
see  neither  sun,  nor  men,  but  only  God.  That 
done,  he  turned  back,  and  God  came  back  to  him. 

It  is  not  a  beautiful  comparison  which  is  some- 
times instituted   between  Delilah  and  Judas  the 


traitor.  For  Samson  was  in  fault,  and  Delilah 
was  a  Philistine.  The  woman  is  more  excusable 
than  the  disciple  who  rose  against  his  pure  Mastci. 
But  Samson  is  the  type  of  all  such  children  ol 
men  as  know  God,  praise  his  grace,  pray  to  Him, 
derive  strength  and  love  from  Him.  and  yet  fall. 
Sin  is  the  ever  present  Delilah,  who  caused  David, 
the  Singer,  to  fall,  and  brought  him  to  tearful 
repentance.  Samson  himself,  rather  than  Delilah, 
was  for  a  moment  the  traitor,  who  delivered  the 
honor  of  his  Lord  to  the  insults  of  the  enemy. 
Let  no  one  think  that  he  can  safely  enter  danger. 
Pride  goes  before  a  fall.  Self-confidence  comes 
to  a  bad  end ;  only  confidence  in  God  conducts 
through  temptaion.  It  is  very  proper  to  pray: 
Lord,  lead  me  not  into  temptation ;  but  very  far 
from  proper  to  enter  into  it  of  one's  own  free-will. 
The  lust  of  the  eyes  is  not  guiltless.  It  is  the 
gate  to  the  most  carnal  desires.  Sin  always  tor- 
tures, even  as  Delilah  tortured  Samson.  It  is 
never  wearied  in  its  efforts  to  induce  virtue  to 
betray  itself.  Flee,  if  thou  canst  not  withstand  ! 
To  flee  from  sin  is  heroism.  Had  Samson  but  run 
away  from  Delilah,  as  a  coward  runs,  he  had  surely 
smitten  the  Philistines.  Every  lapse  into  sin  must 
be  repented  of.  None  of  us  have  aught  wherein 
to  glory,  but  all  stand  in  need  of  repentance. 
When  Saul  recognized  his  sin  in  having  persecuted 
Jesus,  he  became  blind.  But  soon  he  saw,  like 
Samson,  no  one  but  his  Saviour. 

«  Make  me  blind, 
So  I  but  see  thee,  Saviour  kind." 

Starke  :  Even  great  and  holy  persons  may  fall 
into  gross  sins,  if  they  do  not  watch  over  them- 
selves. —  The  same  :  To  uncover  our  whole  heart 
to  God  is  our  duty,  but  we  are  not  bound  to  do  it 
to  our  fellow-men." —  The  same  :  In  the  members 
with  which  men  sin  against  God,  they  are  also 
usuallv  punished  by  God.  —  Gerlach  :  Samson 
thinks  to  hold  as  his  own,  and  to  use  as  he  pleases, 
that  which  was  only  lent  to  him,  and  of  the  bor- 
rowed nature  of  which  his  Nazaritic  distinction 
continually  reminded  him.  It  is  thus  that  he  pre- 
pares his  deep  fall  for  himself.  —  [Wordsworth  : 
Samson  replied  to  Delilah's  temptations  by  three 
lies ;  Christ  replied  to  the  devil's  temptation  by 
three  sayings  from  the  Scripture  of  truth.  —  Tr.] 


Samson's  end.     He  slays  more  Philistines  in  his  death  than  he  had  done  in  life. 

Chapter  XVI.  21-31. 


21  But  [And]  the  Philistines  took  him,  and  put  out  his  eyes,  and  brought  him  down 
to  Gaza  ['Azzah],  and  bound  him  with  fetters  of  brass  ; '  and  he  did  grind  in  the 

22  prison-house.     Howbeit  the  hair  of  his  head  began  to  grow  again  after2  he  was 

23  shaven.  Then  [And]  the  lords  [princes]  of  the  Philistines  gathered  them  [them- 
selves] together,  for  to  offer  a  great  sacrifice  unto  Dagon  their  god,  and  to  rejoice : 

24  for  they  said.  Our  god  hath  delivered  Samson  our  enemy  into  our  hand.  And  when 
[omit :  when]  tin-  people  saw  him,  [and]  they  praised  their  god  :  for  they  said,  Our 
god  hath  delivered  into  our  hands  our  enemy,  and  the  destroyer  [devastator]  of  our 

2?  country  [land]  ;  which  slew  many  of  us  [who  multiplied  our  slain].  And  it  came 
to  pass,  when  their  hearts  were  merrv,  that  they  said.  Call  for  [omit :  for]  Samson 
that  he  may  make  us  sport.3  And  they  called  for  [omit :  for]  Samson  out  of  the 
prison-house ;  and   he   made  them   sport :  and  they  set  him   between  the  pillars. 


CHAPTER  XVI.  21-31. 


221 


26 


And  Samson  said  unto  the  lad  that  held  him  by  the  hand,  Suffer  me  that  I  may 
feel  [touch]  *  the  pillars  whereupon  the  house  standeth,  that  I  may  lean  upon  them. 
Now  the  house  was  full  of  men  and  women  :  and  all  the  lords  [princes]  of  the 
Philistines  were  there  :  and  there  were  upon  the  roof  about  three  thousand  men 
28  and  women,  that  beheld  [looked  on]  while  Samson  made  sport.  And  Samson  called 
unto  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  and  said,  O  Lord  God  [Jehovah],  remember  me,  I  pray 
thee,  and  strengthen  me,  I  pray  thee,  only  this  once,  O  God,  that  I  may  be  at  once 
avenged5  of  the  Philistines  for  my  two  eyes.  And  Samson  took  hold  of  the  two 
middle  pillars  upon  which  the  house  stood,  and  on  which  it  was  borne  up  [and  he 
leaned  upon  them],  of  [on]  the  one  with  his  right  hand,  and  of  [on]  the  other  with 
his  left.  And  Samson  said.  Let  me  die  with  the  Philistines.  And  he  bowed  him- 
self with  all  his  [omit :  all  his]  might ;  and  the  house  fell  upon  the  lords  [princes], 
and  upon  all  the  people  that  were  therein.  So  the  dead  which  he  slew  at  his  death 
were  more  than  they  which  he  slew  in  his  life.  Then  [And]  his  brethren  and  all 
the  house  of  his  father  came  down,  and  took  him,  and  brought  him  up,  and  buried 
him  between  Zorah  and  Eshtaol  in  the  burying-place  of  Manoah  his  father.  And 
he  judged  Israel  twenty  years. 


27 


29 


30 


31 


TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Vcr.  21.  —  Dr.  Cassel  translates,  «  put  him  In  fetters  (Ketten) ;  "  and  adds  the  following  foot-note :  "  D^ntl'TOi 
is  at  2  Kgs.  xxv.  7,  etc.,  are  iron  fetters  {eiserne  Ketlen),  compare  our  expression  to  lie  in  irons.  The  fetter  consisted* o"f 
two  corresponding  parts,  hence  the  dual."  The  word  "  iron  "  in  this  note  is  probably  to  be  taken  in  the  general  senM 
of  "metal,"  for  CN""***-"?"""'*"'  unquestionably  means  "'  brazen  fetters." —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  22.  —  ""ItTS*""'  :  rf  about  the  time  that,"  or  (c  as  soon  as."  The  word  Intimates  that  Samson  was  not  long  In 
the  wretched  condition  of  prisoner.  As  soon  as  his  hair  began  measurably  to  grow,  the  events  about  to  be  related  oc- 
curred.    So  Bertheau  and  EelL  —  Tr.] 

[8  Ter.  25.—  "13  V"pnti''',>1.  Like  the  E.  V.,  Dr.  Cassel,  De  Wette,  and  Bunsen  (Bibtlwerlc),  adopt  general  render- 
ings, which  leave  the  kind  of  sport  afforded  by  Samson,  and  the  way  in  which  he  furnished  it,  undetermined.  Bush 
remarks  that  ""  it  is  quite  improbable  that  Samson,  a  poor  blind  prisoner,  should  be  required  actively  to  engage  in  any- 
thing that  should  make  sport  to  his  enemies."  But  the  decidedly  active  expression  in  the  next  clause,  Or*P2D  V  pn^"*! 
can  scarcely  be  interpreted  of  a  mere  passive  submission  to  mockery  on  the  part  of  Samson  (cf.  also  ver.  27).  The  word 
pn"*i  (pTlffl  is  a  softening  of  the  same  form)  is  used  of  mimic  dances,  cf.  Ex.  xxxii.  6 ;  1  Sam.  xviii.  7 ;  2  Sam.  vi.  6, 
21.  etc.  There  is  surely  no  great  improbability  in  supposing  that  the  Philistines  in  the  height  of  their  revels  should  call 
upon  "  a  poor,  blind  prisoner  "  to  execute  a  dance,  for  their  own  delectation  and  for  his  deeper  humiliation  ;  while,  on 
the  other  hand,  Samson's  acquiescence  may  be  explained  from  his  desire  to  gain  a  favorable  opportunity  for  executing 
his  dread  design.  After  the  fatiguing  dance,  his  request  to  be  permitted  to  K  lean  upon  "  the  pillars  would  appear  very 
natural.  —  Tr.] 

4  Ver.  26.  —  *,3"2''*,Qn  (instead  of  the  erroneous  Eethibh  *Ot*,.''D*'n,  from  a  root  tE^rfO*',  which  does  not  occur): 

from  tl''ti,'"0,  tr*1"2,  paaaui,  to  touch  ;  onomatopoetic,  like palpare. 

[6  Ver.  28.  —  nnS'CrD  nj2r2S"l.      Dr.  Cassel's  rendering  is  very  similar  to  that  of  the  E.  V. :  Doss  id)  noch 
_  -       ,_.        Ti.T.. 

einmal  Vergeltung  netime  um  mtiner  zwei  Augen  urillen  —  tr  let  me  once  more  take  vengeance,  this  time  for  my  two  eyes. ' 
But  unless  Dp3  is  here  feminine,  contrary  to  rule,  this  rendering  is  against  the  consonants,  to  say  nothing  of  the  vowel 
points.  The  text,  as  it  stands,  mnst  be  read  :  "that  I  be  avenged  with  the  vengeance  of  one  (St.  eye,  which  Is  fern.) 
out  of  my  two  eyes."     Compare  the  exegesis  below.  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL    AXD   DOCTRINAL,. 

Ver.  21 .  And  the  Philistines  laid  hold  of  him. 
The  catastrophe  is  terrible.  The  fall  of  a  hero  is 
sorrowful  and  lamentable  beyond  anything  else. 
Wretched  enemies  make  themselves  master  of  one 
who  for  twenty  years  had  been  victorious.  In  the 
giddiness  of  a  broken  spirit  he  succumbs  to  the 
multitude,  as  a  wounded  lion  succumbs  to  a  pack 
of  yelping  hounds.  But  even  in  this  extremity, 
he  must  have  given  proof  of  the  strength  of  his 
arm.  The  cruel  precaution  of  the  Philistines  indi- 
cates this.  They  do  not  kill  him,  for  they  hate 
him  too  intensely  ;  but  even  before  they  bring  him 
to  Gaza,  they  put  out  his  eyes.  He  must  be  made 
oowfrless  by  blindness  ;  not  until  then,  they  think, 
irill  it  be  wise  to  lav  aside  all  fear  of  him.     Well 


does  the  Jewish  expositor  remark  on  this  infliction, 
that  Samson  now  loses  his  eyes,  and  is  fettered 
with  chains,  because  heretofore  he  followed  his 
eyes  too  much,  and  allowed  himself  to  be  fettered 
by  the  allurements  of  the  senses.  In  what  horri- 
ble sins  will  not  the  savage  hatred  of  men  engage  ! 
All  cruelty  is  a  frenzy  of  unbelief ;  but  sin  is  rav- 
ing mad  when  it  offends  against  the  eye,  and  stops 
up  the  fountain  of  light,  life's  source  of  joy  and 
freedom.  It  does  not  excuse  the  Philistines  that 
they  are  not  the  only  ones  who  have  resorted  to 
this  satanic  practice.  The  practice,  liie  every  other 
sin,  has  its  world-wide  history.  A  profound  and 
thoughtful  myth  concerni  ag  this  matter  is  found  in 
Herodotus  (ix.  93),  according  to  which  the  blind- 
ing of  Evenius,  a  priest  of  the  Sun-grid,  is  pun 
ished  on  the  false  zealots  who  inflicted  it.     Never 


222 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


theless,  this  infernal  fury  has  been  familiar  to  men 
in  every  land  on  which  the  sun  shines.1  The  mon- 
uments of  Nineveh  show  us  a  king,  who  with  his 
lance  puts  out  the  eyes  of  his  prisoners,  as  Neb- 
uchadnezzar caused  to  be  done  to  Zedekiah,  the 
fallen  king  of  Judah.  There  existed  even  different 
theories  of  this  cruel  art.  Among  the  Persians,  as 
Procopius  informs  us  (in  his  Persian  Memorabilia, 
i.  6),  it  was  usual  either  to  pour  red-hot  oil  into  the 
eyes,  or  to  dig  thern  out  with  red-hot  needles.  The 
latter  mode  is  probably  expressed  by  the  Hebrew 

"Tj93,  to  bore  out  the  eye,  oculum  effodere  (cf.  my 
Schamir,  p.  86).  The  terrible  method  of  passing 
over  the  eye  with  a  glowing  iron,  was  not  consid- 
ered to  be  always  effective,  and  left  in  many  cases 
some  slight  power  of  enjoying  the  light  (cf.  Des- 
guigne's  Gesch.  der  Hunnen,  iv.  93,  etc.).  The 
Middle  Ages  called  it  abbacinare  (so  the  Italian 
still) ;  for  Christian  nations  have  not  kept  them- 
selves free  from  this  abomination.  It  was  prac- 
ticed not  only  among  the  Byzantines  (where  Isaak 
Comnenus  is  a  celebrated  example),  but  also  among 
the  Franks  (cf.  Chilperich's  laws,  in  Gregor.  Turon., 
Hist.  Franc,  vi.  46)  ;  likewise  among  the  Normans, 
where,  to  be  sure,  Robert  of  Belesme  (the  Devil) 
did  not  content  himself  with  it.  German  popular 
law  also  placed  it  among  its  penalties.  In  the  se- 
dition of  Cologne  (1074),  it  was,  as  Lambert  re- 
lates, inflicted  on  his  enemies  by  the  ecclesiastical 
prince  of  the  city.  Reminiscences  of  it  are  pre- 
served in  the  popular  legends  of  North  Germany. 
We  may  cite  the  story  of  the  man  who  derived 
great  strength  by  means  of  a  blue  band  which  he 
wore,  and  who,  after  a  woman  had  betrayed  him, 
was  deprived  of  his  eyes  (MiillenhofF,  p.  419). 

The  story  which  represents  Belisarius,  the  great 
hero  of  Justinian's  reign,  as  deprived  of  his  eyes, 
and  begging  for  oboli  in  the  streets  of  Constanti- 
nople, is  a  fiction  of  later  times ;  but  it  falls  far 
short  of  the  unspeakable  misery  actually  endured 
by  Samson.  The  consciousness  of  the  treason  of 
which  he  had  been  guilty  towards  God,  and  which 
had  been  so  terribly  practiced  toward  himself;  the 
fall  from  a  height  so  glorious  and  prosperous,  into 
an  indescribable  dishonor;  the  impotence  of  the 
formerly  victorious  freeman,  the  blindness  of  one 
so  sharp-witted,  the  chains  on  his  consecrated  body, 
the  yells  of  triumph  of  the  cowardly  foe,  —  all  this 
overwhelmed  his  soul  so  powerfully,  that  one  less 
great  than  he  had  died  for  grief.  And  his  people 
kept  silence.  But  the  Philistines  still  feared  him, 
even  in  his  blindness.  They  fettered  him  with  iron 
chains,  and  made  him  turn  a  mill  in  the  prison.'2 
Deeper  dishonor  could  not  be  inflicted.  For  the 
hero  of  divine  freedom  was  made  to  perform  the 
work  of  a  slave.  It  is  well  known  that  in  an- 
tiquity the  work  of  grinding  was  done  by  slaves 
(Ex.  xi.  5  ;  xii.  29).  The  slaves  thus  employed  were 
moreover  considered  the  lowest,3  worth  less  money 
than  any  others,  and  as  such  found  themselves  in 
the  worst  situation  (cf.  Bockh,  Staatshaushalt  der 
Athener,  i.  95,  ed.  2d).  The  depth  of  Samson's 
humiliation  is  as  great  as  his  former  elevation. 
But  in  the  midst  of  his  untold  sufferings,  — 

Ver.  22.  The  hair  of  his  head  began  to  grow 
again.  With  blinded  eyes  he  began  spiritually  to 
gee  —  fettered  with  chains  he  became  free  —  under 
slavish  labor  he  ripened  for  the  freedom  of  God. 

1  If  Herodotus  is  to  be  believed,  the  Scythians  blinded 
ivery  slave  (iv.  2).  Alexander  Severus  is  reported  to  have 
toirt.  that  whenever  he  saw  a  bad  judge  he  felt  inclined  to 
K»r  his  eye  out  with  his  finger  (Lanipridius,  17  ;  cf  Saluia- 
rios  on  the  passage.) 


While  he  was  yet  prosperous,  the  person  of  De- 
lilah interposed  between  his  sight  and  his  calling 
and  duty  for  his  people;  now,  though  blind  and 
within  prison  walls,  he  saw  the  power  and  great- 
ness of  his  God.  He  recognized  his  error,  and  re- 
pented. The  greatness  of  the  fallen  Smiiisoii  con- 
sisted in  this,  that,  like  all  noble  natures  in  similar 
circumstances,  he  became  greater  and  freer  in  the 
deepest  suffering  than  he  had  been  before. 

Vers.  23,  24.  And  the  princes  of  the  Philis- 
tines assembled  themselves.  A  general  feast  of 
thanksgiving  and  sacrifices  was  to  be  celebrated  in 
Gaza.  This  shows  that  Gaza  was  at  that  time  the 
leading  Philistine  city,  and  that  Dagon,  the  fish- 
shaped  god  (3 J,  fish),  was  regarded  by  them  as  the 
embodiment  of  the  religious  antithesis  between 
them  and  Israel.  Dagon,  the  sea-god,  as  it  were, 
who  protects  the  cities  on  the  coast,  over  against 
the  God  of  Israel,  who  has  won  the  main  land. 
The  celebration  arranged  by  the  Philistines,  at- 
tended by  all  their  tribes  and  princes,  testifies  to 
the  unheard-of  terror  inspired  by  Samson.  The 
circumstance  that  they  express  their  joy  in  the 
form  of  thanksgivings  and  sacrifices  to  their  god, 
is,  in  itself  considered,  singular,  seeing  that  they 
well  knew  by  what  foul  means  the  victory  had  been 
gained  ;  but  it  is  none  the  less  instructive.  Israel 
could  learn  from  it  that  the  Philistines  regarded 
every  victory  over  one  of  their  number  as  at  the 
same  time  an  act  of  their  deity,  —  being  better  in 
this  respect  than  the  Israelites,  who  continually 
forgot  the  great  deeds  of  their  God. 

Vers.  25-27.  Call  Samson  that  he  may  make 
us  sport.  The  Philistine  thanksgiving  was  like 
themselves.  Men  may  be  known  by  their  feasts. 
Here  there  was  no  thought  of  humility.  Serious- 
ness also  is  wanting,  although  they  remind  them- 
selves of  their  losses.  The  truth  is,  repentance, 
most  attractive  in  prosperity,  is  unknown  to 
heathen.  They  praise  their  god,  it  is  true,  but 
they  do  not  pray.  They  celebrate  a  popular  festi- 
val, characterized  by  eating,  drinking,  and  boast- 
ing. They  were  in  high  spirits  over  a  victory  for 
which  they  had  not  fought,  Their  joy  reaches  its 
acme  when  they  send  for  Samson.  He  is  brought 
in,  chained  like  a  bear.  A  people  shows  its  worst 
side  when  it  heaps  mockery  and  insult  on  a  de- 
fenseless foe.  How  would  the  Romans  have  treated 
Hannibal  had  they  taken  him  prisoner  ?  How  was 
Jugurtha  treated,  when  he  was  dragged  into  Rome 
in  the  triumph  of  Marius !  But  this  Numidian 
fox  was  rendered  insane  over  the  disgrace  inflicted 
upon  him  (Plut.,  Vita  Mar.,  12).  The  blind  lion 
of  Israel,  on  the  contrary,  walks  calmly  on,  al- 
ready conscious  of  the  restored  consecration  of  God 
on  his  head.  His  appearance  afforded  the  highest 
sport ;  and  the  circumstance  that  every  Philistine 
could  dare  to  touch  and  mock,  and  otherwise  abuse 
the  blind  hero,  raised  their  mirth  to  the  highest 
pitch.  But  pride  goes  before  a  fall ;  and  they  did  not 
yet  sufficiently  know  the  man  whom  they  derided. 

And  they  placed  him  between  the  pillars. 
Much  has  been  written  concerning  the  architec- 
tural style  of  the  building  in  which  the  occurrence 
took  place.  Bertheau  is  not  wrong  in  saying  that 
it  is  impossible  to  come  to  any  particular  deter- 
mination in  this  matter.  It  was  not  essential  to 
our  narrator's  purpose  to  give  an  architectural  de- 

-  Later  writers,  in  putting  king  Zedekiah  at  the  same  la- 
bor, intended  doubtless  to  conform  his  fate  to  that  of  Sam- 
son (cf.  Bwald,  Gesch.  Israels,  iii.  748,  2d  edition). 

■2  Which  fact  explains  the  anecdote  In  JSliau,  farm 
Historia,  riv.  18 


CHAPTERS   XVI.  21-31. 


223 


•cription.  Nevertheless,  his  language  aftbrds  the 
materials  for  an  intelligible  conception.  The  de- 
sign of  placing  Samson  between  the  pillars  was 
evidently  to  enable  all  to  see  him  :  in  other  words, 
to  put  him  in  the  midst  of  the  assembly.  Now, 
according  to  ancient  conceptions,  Heaven  and  At- 
las are  keepers  of  pillars ;  and  whether  they  hold 
fast 1  both  pillars,  or  with  their  shoulders  themselves 
constitute  the  pillars,  they  cannot  leave  their  places 
without  causing  the  heavens  to  fall.  This  poeti- 
cal view  is  also  found  in  Job  xxvi.  11,  where  the 
pillars  of  the  heavens  reel  at  God's  reproof.  Of 
this  conception  the  ttmple-building  at  Gaza  was  a 
representation.  Two  mighty  pillars  supported  the 
chief  beams  of  the  vast  building.  Round  about  the 
house  there  ran  a  gallery,  where  the  populace  found 

a  place.  This  was  called  33,  the  same  term  which 
is  applied  to  the  flat  roofs  of  oriental  houses,  which, 
properly  speaking,  are  only  open  galleries,  sur- 
rounded by  trellis-work.  These  estrades  or  galleries 
cannot  have  been  supported  by  the  main  pillars  ;  - 
for  in  that  case  many  would  not  have  been  able  to  see 
Samson.  The  hero  would  be  visible  to  all,  only  if  he 
stood  in  the  lower  space,  between  the  pillars  on 
which  the  house  was  supported,  the  gallery  extend- 
ing around  the  sides  of  the  house,  and  fastened  to 
them ;  and  .there  is  nothing  at  variance  with  this  in 
his  request  to  the  lad  to  be  allowed  to  lean  upon  the 
pillars.  On  closer  inspection,  our  narrator  tells 
much  more  than  is  at  first  apparent.  Samson  was  ev- 
idently previously  acquainted  with  the  arrangement 
of  the  building.  He  knew,  too,  that  he  had  been 
placed  in  the  centre,  or  it  may  have  been  told  him 
by  the  lad.  There  were  other  pillars :  perhaps  a  por- 
tico extended  around  the  building.  But  Samson  re- 
quests expressly  to  be  led  to  the  principal  pillars, 
"  on  which  the  house  rests."     The  lower  part  of 

the  house  was  filled  with  C,tE'3^  and  E'W'l,  men 
and  women  of  distinction,  together  with  the  princes, 
and  was  called  'T?;    the  gallery  (33)  contained 

three  thousand  persons,  ntTS")  ti^N,  i.  e.,  the 
common  people.  That  this  gallery  was  in  the 
house,  that  is,  under  the  covering  upborne  by  the 
pillars,  and  hence  fell  with  the  house,  is  evident 
from  ver.  30,  where  we  read  that  the  "  house  fell " 
npon  all  "  that  were  therein." 

Ver.  28.  And  Samson  called  unto  Jehovah. 
This  shows  that  he  had  fully  recovered  himself. 
As  soon  as  he  can  pray  again,  he  is  the  hero  again. 
The  prayer  he  now  offers  is  full  of  fervor  and  in- 
tensity, rising  heavenward  like  smoke  from  the 
altar  of  incense.  It  is  the  deep  and  vast  com- 
plaint which,  after  the  awful  experiences  of  the 
last  days,  grief  and  hope  have  caused  to  gather  in 
his  soul.  He  uses  all  the  names  of  God  with 
which  he  is  acquainted,  and  confesses  Him,  in  the 
darkness  which  surrounds  him,  more  deeply  and 
fervently  than  formerly  when  enjoying  the  light  of 
the  sun.  And  withal,  his  thoughts  are  beautifully 
arranged.  For  fervor  excels  all  homiletical  art. 
The  prayer  divides  into  three  parts,  and  makes 
use  of  three  names  of  God.  Each  part  con- 
tains three  nicely  separated  thoughts.     He  begins  : 

"  Lord  03  iS)  Jehovah  (nifT)),  remember  me." 
In  the  midst  of  servitude,  chained  and  fettered  by 
the  Philistines,  who  lord  it  over  him,  bring  him  in 
wd  send   him  out  as  they  choose,  his  spirit  calls 

1  As  implied  in  the  words  :  e'\f  t  AV  re  Ktovas,  Odys.,  i.  53. 

l  As  Stark  thinks  ( Gaza,  p.  332)   whose  conception  is  for 

01  that  by  no  means  clear.     Nor  is  it  necessary  to  suppose 


upon  Adonai,  the  Lord  who  is  in  heaven  In  the 
midst  of  Philistine  jubilations  over  the  ■etory  of 
their  idol,  the  seeming  triumph  of  their  Dagon,  ^ie 
calls  on  Jehovah,  the  great  God  of  Israel,  for  He 
alone  is  the  Lord.  Alone  and  forsaken,  surrounded 
by  raging  foes,  he  cries  to  God  :  "  Do  thou  remem 

ber  me."  The  word  ~OJ  is  most  frequently  used 
of  God's  gracious  mindfulness  of  any  one,  ex- 
pressing itself  in  caring  for  him.  It  is  with  a 
heart  full  of  penitence  that  he  makes  this  petition. 
For  formerly  God  had  departed  from  him,  and  he 
had  been  deprived  of  God's  care  over  him.  If  now 
God  but  takes  thought  of  him,  he  will  once  more 
be  received  into  divine  favor. 

And  strengthen  me,  only  this  once,  O  God. 
"  Strengthen  me."  He  no  longer  puts  his  trust 
in  himself,  nor  yet  in  his  growing  hair.  The 
source  of  the  consecration  and  strength  which 
formerly  adorned  him,  and  for  the  return  of  which 
he  pleads,  is  in  God.     For  this  reason,  he  invokes 

God  anew,  —  this  time  as  CH  ^H.  Elohim, 
with  the  article,  is  the  true,  the  only  Elohim, 
namely,  the  God  of  Israel  (cf.  above,  on  ch.  vi.  20 
and  36  ;  and  on  ch.  viii.  3  ;  xiii.  18).  While  all 
around  him,  the  enemies  praise  their  god  as  the 
victor  (ver.  24),  he  prays  to  the  God  of  Israel,  that 
He,  the  real  Elohim,  the  true  strength,  would 
strengthen  him  "yet  this  once."  He  does  not  ask 
to  be  the  former  Samson  again.  He  has  done  with 
life.  After  such  disgrace,  he  would  not  wish  to 
return  to  it.  Only  for  "  this  time,"  he  prays 
for  strength,  which  God  gives  and  takes  as  He  will, 
allowing  no  one  to  suppose,  as  Samson  formerly 
did,  that  it  is  an  inalienable  possession,  whether 
used  or  abused.  In  the  third  place,  he  declares  the 
purpose  for  which  he  desires  the  strength  :  — 

That  I  may  yet  once  take  vengeance  on 
the  Philistines,  by  reason  of  my  two  eyes. 
Is  it  right  to  pray  thus  ?  For  Samson  it  is.  For 
he  was  called  to  recompense  the  Philistines ;  his 
whole  task  was  directed  against  the  tyrants.  He 
fell  only  because  instead  of  avenging  the  wrongs 
of  his  people  on  their  oppressors,  he  squandered  his 
strength  with  the  Philistine  woman.  If  now  he 
desires  the  restoration  of  his  lost  strength,  he  can 
lawfully  do  so  only  for  the  purpose  for  which  it  was 
originally  given.  To  rend  cords  in  pieces  for  sport 
was  not  his  business,  but  to  make  the  enemy  ac- 
quainted with  the  power  of  the  gracious  God  of 
Israel. 

But  may  he  then  demand  recompense  for  his 
"  two  eyes  ?  "  As  Samson,  he  may.  In  his 
prayer,  it  is  true,  he  did  not  plead  his  consecration 
as  a  "  Nazarite  of  God  ;  "  in  his  humility  he  dares 
not  use  this  plea,  since  a  razor  has  passed  over  his 
head.  But  it  was  nevertheless  on  this  account 
that  he  had  his  strength.  It  resided  in  him,  not 
as  man,  but  as  Nazarite.  It  was  not  his,  although 
he  misused  it ;  it  was  lent  him,  for  his  people, 
against  the  enemy.  But  now,  his  strength,  even 
if  fully  restored,  would  avail  him  nothing.  The 
loss  of  both  his  eyes  rendered  it  useless.  He  could 
not,  like  a  blind  chieftain,  —  like  Dandolo,  the  doge 
of  Venice,  and  Ziska,  the  Bohemian,  —  lead  his 
people  to  battle,  for  he  is  no  chieftain,  but  a  hero, 
who  stands  and  fights  alone.  The  loss  of  his  eyes 
therefore,  closes  his  career.  Blindness  disables  hint 
from  serving  longer  as  the  instrument  of  the  God 
of  Israel.     Hence,  he  desires  vengeance,  not  foi 


that  the  pillars  were  wooden  posts, 
size,  they  were  most  likely  of  stone. 


In  a  buil. lint  of  sur* 


224 


THE  BOOK  OF   JUDGES. 


the  scott.,  dishonor,  chains  and  prison,  to  which 
he  has  been  subjected,  but  only  for  his  two  eyes  » 

—  had  they  left 'him  but  one !  The  vengeance  he 
seeks  is  not  for  himself,  but  for  his  people  and  the 
God  who  chose  him. 

His  language,  it  is  true,  contains  the  contrast  of 

of  one  recompense  (nnS"D~3)  for  his  two  eyes. 
The  explanation  is  that  he  can  strike  but  one 
blow  more  ;  but  that  one,  in  his  mind  and  within 
hU  reach,  will  suffice  for  both  eyes.  He  will  inflict 
this  blow  on  the  Philistines,  who  all  around  him 
praise  tlie  idol  who  gave  them  victory,  whereas  it 
was  only  his  former  mental  blindness  that  caused 
his  fall,  and  his  present  physical  blindness  that 
gives  them  their  sense  of  security. 

Three  times  he  attempted  to  withstand  Delilah 

—  three  times  he  played  with  his  strength,  —  and 
fell.  Now,  he  prayed  three  times,  to  the  thrice- 
named  God,  the  triunity  of  Jehovah,  for  understand- 
ing and  strength. 

Ver.  29.  And  Samson  took  hold  of  the  mid- 
dle pillars.  He  shows  himself  in  all  his  old  great- 
ness again.  For  the  first  time  he  stood  again  in  a 
crowd  of  Philistines,  and  at  once  began  to  think 
of  battle.  And  notwithstanding  the  wretched 
condition  in  which  he  found  himself,  he  fixed  at 
once  on  the  point  where  he  intends  to  execute  his 
deed.  His  blindness  becomes  a  means  of  victory. 
He  stands  between  the  central  pillars,  on  which  the 
building  rests,  and  between  which  the  distance  is 
not  great.  Being  blind,  it  may  be  allowed  him  to 
take  hold  of  them,  in  order  to  support  himself  by 

them.  (That  fEv  may  mean  to  take  hold  of, 
although  found  in  that  sense  only  here,  is  shown 
bv  theanalogy  of  the  Sanskrit  labh,  Greek  Aau/3a- 
v'uv,  Aa/3«;V.)  He  presses  them  firmly  with  both 
arms,  and  says  :  — 

Ver.  30.  Let  me  die  with  the  Philistines. 
The  very  conception  of  the  deed  is  extraordinary. 
While  the  Philistines  rejoice,  drink,  and  mock, 
worse  than  Belshazzar,  and  fancy  the  blinded  hero 
deeply  humiliated  and  put  to  shame,  he,  on  the 
contrary,  is  about  to  perform  the  deed  of  a  giant, 
and  stands  among  them  in  the  capacity  of  a  war- 
rior about  to  enter  battle,  who  only  tarries  to  con  - 
mend  his  cause  to  God.  It  is  true,  he  cannot  do 
what  he  intends  to  do  without  losing  his  own  life  ; 
but  he  lived  only  to  conquer.  Victory  is  more 
than  life.  To  talk  here  of  suicide  is  wholly  un- 
suitable. He  did  not  kill  himself  when  plunged 
in  the  deepest  dishonor.  He  is  too  great  for 
cowardly  suicide ;  for  it  is  a  species  of  flight,  and 
heroes  do  not  flee.  No  :  the  blinded  man  perceives 
that  the  present  moment  holds  out  an  occasion  for 
victory,  and  avails  himself  of  it,  notwithstanding 
that  it  must  cost  him  his  own  life.-  It  is  not  as  if 
he  would  have  killed  himself,  had  he  escaped.  He 
knows  that  if  his  deed  be  successful,  he  cannot 
escape.  But  he  is  also  ready  to  die.  He  is  recon- 
ciled with  his  God  :  his  eyes'  have  again  seen  Him 
who  was  his  strength. 

1  Consequently,  I  cannot  follow  the  unsuitable  exegesis 
which  makes  Samson  ask  to  be  avenged  for  one  of  his  two 
ijyes.     That  would  be  simple  vindictiveness.     The  ^O  in 


VltrO  is  comparative.  He  desires  a  vengeance  greater 
than  his  two  ey2S,  and  taken  on  account  of  them.  The  Jew- 
,sh  exegesis  on'.y  follows  a  special  homiletical  idea,  which  at 
nottom  undereands  (rtwo  eyes." 

2  Augustimi,  Dc  Chit.  Dei,  1,  26:  Quid  si  enim  hoc 
fecerunl  non  lumanihis  deceptce  sed  divinilus  jussa,  nee  er- 
■(intes,  sed  obt  dientes,  sicut  de  Santsone  aliud  nobis  /as  non 
wl  credere. 


The  tragedy  ends  terribly.  Laughter  and  shont 
and  drunken  revel  are  at  their  highest,  when  Sam- 
son bends  the  pillars  with  great  force  : 3  they 
break,  the  building  falls,4  —  a  terrific  crash,  and 
the  temple  is  a  vast  sepulchre.  O  Dagon,  where 
is  thy  victory  ?  O  Gaza,  where  is  thy  strength  * 
Princes  and"  priests,  together,  with  cups  at  their 
lips,  and  mockery  in  their  hearts,  are  crushed  by 
the  falling  stone.'  With  piercing  cries,  the  vast 
crowds  are  pressed  together.  The  galleries,  with 
their  burdens,  precipitate  themselves  upon  the  heads 
of  those  below.  Death  was  swifter  than  any  res- 
cue ;  the  change  from  the  sounds  of  rejoicing  to 
groans  and  the  rattle  of  death,  terrible  as  the  light- 
ning. In  the  midst  of  them,  great  and  joyou8, 
stood  the  hero,  and  met  his  death.  Not  now  with 
the  bone  of  an  ass,  but  with  pillars  of  marble,  had 
he  conquered  the  foe.  Dagon 's  temple,  with  its 
thousands,  had  been  heaped  up  as  his  grave-mound. 
Since  Samson  must  die,  he  could  not  have  fallen 
greater.  Traitors,  tormentors,  mockers,  enemies, 
tyrants,  all  lay  at  his  feet.  The  blind  hero  died  as 
the  great  victor,  who,  in  penitence  and  prayer,  ex- 
piated, by  suffering  and  death,  the  errors  of  which 
he  had  been  guilty. 

The  history  of  Samson  excels  all  poetry.  The 
simple  narrative  of  it  is  at  the  same  time  adorned 
with  the  highest  art.  Its  fidelity  and  truth  are 
testified  to  by  the  heart  of  every  reader.  Without 
magic  arts,  with  only  natural  grief  and  death,  it  is 
nevertheless  full  of  spiritual  marvels. 

But  who  furnished  the  roort  of  the  last  hours  of 
the  hero's  life  ?  Who  escapi  .,  so  as  to  set  forth  his 
praying  and  acting  3  It  would  seem  as  if  this  also 
were  not  left  quite  unhinted  by  the  brief  narrative. 

A  lad,  an  attendant  ("'??),  leads  him,  when  the 
Philistines  call  him  in  from  the  prison  (ver.  26). 
It  may  be  plausibly  conjectured  that  this  was  no 
Philistine.  It  seems  not  improbable  that  Sam- 
son, the  Judge,  was  followed  into  his  prison  by  an 
attendant,  whose  fidelity  continued  unshaken.  It 
enhanced  the  triumph  "of  the  Philistines  to  allow 
this.  Upon  this  supposition,  many  points  explain 
themselves.  This  attendant,  then,  may  have  fur- 
nished him  with  a  description  of  the  festive  scene 
into  the  midst  of  which  he  was  introduced,  and  in- 
formed him  in  what  part  of  the  building  he  was 
placed.  From  him  he  could  also  obtain  guidance 
to  the  spot  which  he  deemed  it  necessary  to  occupy. 
This  attendant  was  in  the  secret  of  his  prayer  and 
purpose ;  and  if  we  assume  that  he  dismissed  him 
before  the  catastrophe,  we  are  at  once  enabled  to  ex- 
plain how  he  could  take  up  his  peculiar  position  by 
the  pillars  without  exciting  attention.  Thus  the 
faithful  follower  escaped  death,  and  quickly  re- 
ported the  event  at  home. 

Ver.  31.  And  his  brethren  and  all  his  father's 
house  came  down.  This  is  the  first  hint  we  have 
of  interest  in  Samson  on  the  part  of  his  brethren, 
and  the  house  of  his  father.  The  haste,  however, 
with  which  they  proceeded  to  Gaza,  and  the  great 
8  The  occurrence  in  Paus.  vi.  9  is  not  well  adapted  to  b« 
brought  into  comparison. 

4  The  terrors  of  a  similar  calamity,  although  on  a  smaller 
scale,  were  experienced  by  King  Henry,  the  son  of  Barba- 
rossa,  in  1183,  when  the  pillars  and  floor  of  the  "  Probate^" 
at  Erfurt,  gave  way.  Many  perished.  Only  the  king  and 
the  bishop,  who  sat  in  a  niche,  escaped  (cf.  Citron.  Mont. 
S-rrni,  under  1183,  p.  48,  ed.  Mader).  On  the  21st  of  July, 
1864,  one  of  the  granite  pillars,  which  supported  the  dome 
of  the  Church  of  the  Transfiguration,  at  St.  Petersburg, 
broke.  A  frightful  catastrophe  ensued,  as  the  church 
crumbled  to  pieces  over  the  masses  whom  curiosity  h*4 
drawn  together. 


CHAPTER   XVI.   21-31. 


225 


fellowship  in  which  they  did  it,  speak  well  for 
them.  They  may  have  arrived  soon  enough  to  see 
the  heap  of  "ruins,  with  its  countless  dead  bodies, 
just  as  it  fell.  They  took  Samson  and  carried  him 
up  in  solemn  funeral  procession  (such  is  probably 

the  meaning  of  VTM  ^Stt??!),  to  the  burial-place 
of  his  father,  who  had  not  lived  to  see  the  sorrow 
of  his  great  son.1  The  terrified  Philistines  permit- 
ted everything.  Anguish  and  mourning  reigned 
among  them.  Everything  was  in  confusion  — 
their  princes  were  dead.  And  so  the  corpse  of  the 
hero  who  smote  them  more  fearfully  in  death  than 
in  life,  was  borne  in  silent  procession  along  their 
borders. 

And  he  judged  Israel  twenty  years.  This 
statement  is  here  repeated  in  order  to  intimate  that 
Samson's  official  term  had  not  come  to  a  close  be- 
fore the  events  just  related,  but  terminated  with 
it. 

Samson  lived  and  died  in  conflict  with  the  na- 
tional enemies,  the  Philistines.  The  same  fate  has 
befallen  his  history  and  its  exposition,  from  the 
time  of  Julian  the  imperial  Philistine  to  that  of 
many  writers  of  the  last  centuries.  It  was  espe- 
cially in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries 
that  irreverence  was  too  often  called  criticism,  and 
that  frivolous  insipidity  was  considered  free  in- 
quiry. The  aesthetic  vapidness  which  was  in  part 
banished  from  the  field  of  classical  and  German 
literature,  continued  to  nestle  in  the  exegesis  of  the 
Old  Testament.2  Joh.  Philipp  Heine  may  indeed 
have  been  right  in  saying  (Dissertat.  Sacrce,  p. 
259),  that  the  mockery  at  Samson's  jaw-bone  and 
foxes,  had  an  ulterior  object  in  view  ;  but  it  was  for 
the  most  part  the  Philistine-like,  prosaic  character 
which  ordinarily  marks  genuine  unbelief,  that  was 
unable  to  comprehend  and  rightly  estimate  the 
wonderful  drama  of  Samson's  life.  An  unfruitful 
comparison  with  Hercules  was  constantly  iterated, 
although  deeper  insight  clearly  shows  that,  apart 
from  the  lion-conquest  common  to  both,  Hercules 
is  of  all  Greek  heroes  the  least  suitable  to  be  com- 
pared with  Samson.  The  ingenuity  of  the  earlier 
ecclesiastical  teachers  might,  nevertheless,  have  led 
them  to  this  comparison.  But  according  to  Piper 
(Myth,  der  Christl.  Kunst.,  i.  131),  primitive  Chris- 
tian art  never  represented  even  so  much  as  the  con- 
flict of  Samson  with  the  lion  ;  and  later  works  of 
art  connected  Hercules  with  David  as  well  as  with 
Samson.  Menzel  (Symbolik,  ii.  380),  is  of  opinion 
that  the  representation  of  Samson,  in  the  act  of 
tearing  open  the  jaws  of  the  lion,  over  French  and 
German  church-doors  of  the  Middle  Ages,  is  an 
imitation  of  similar  Mithras  pictures.  The  repre- 
sentation of  Samson  with  one  foot  on  the  lion, 
while  with  his  hands  he  throttles  him,  typical  in 
Byzantine  pictures,  is  essentially  the  same  concep- 
tion (Schafer,  Handlmch  der  Materei,  p.  127).  The 
noblest  conception  or  him  in  modern  poetry,  is  that 
of  Milton's  Samson  Agonistes ;  but  that  drama 
treats  only  the  end  of  Samson's  life,  and  notwith- 
standing its  lofty  thoughts  and  Christian  fervor 
disfigures  the  beautiful  simplicity  of  Scripture  by 
operatic  additions.  Handel's  oratorio,  Samson 
(performed  for  the  first  time  in  London,  October 
12,  1742).  the  text  of  which  is  by  Milton,  but  not 
worthy  of  the  great  subject,  is  celebrated.  The  es- 
teemed composer,  Joachim  Raft',  intended  to  pre- 
pare a  Samson  opera ;  but  whether  it  was  ever  per- 

1  It  ia  therefore  only  poetically  that  Milton  represents 
Manoah  as  still  alive  at  the  time  of  Samson's  catastrophe. 

2  In  a  writing  against  the  Jews  (Berlin,  1804),  Samson's 
■etion  is  styWd  tf  scheusslich  "  (abominable). 

15 


formed  I  do  not  know.  At  what  a  low  ebb  the 
appreciation  of  the  Book  of  Judges  and  of  Samson 
stood  in  the  last  century,  is  shown  by  Herder's 
dialogue  (  Geist  der  Ebraiscll.  Poesie,  Werke,  ii.  204), 
in  which  the  poet  endeavors  indeed  to  elevate  the 
narrative,  but  can  only  find  its  "  most  character- 
istically peculiar  and  beautiful  features,"  in  mat- 
ters incidental  to  the  main  story. 

It  is  not  quite  clear  how  the  Roman  Catholic 
legend  made  a  physician  of  Samson  ; 3  and  it  was 
certainly  far  from  appropriate  when  a  jurist  of  the 
seventeenth  century  (La  Mothe  le  Bayer,  died 
1672)  represented  him  as  the  model  of  a  skeptical 
thinker.*  He  is  a  type  of  the  ancient  people  Israel 
itself  (cf.  the  Introduction),  which  is  everywhere 
victorious,  so  long  as  it  preserves  its  consecration 
intact,  but  falls  into  servitude  and  bondage  as  soon 
as  it  profanes  its  own  sacred  character.  The  types 
of  the  ancient  Church  fathers,  in  which  they  com- 
pare the  life  and  sufferings  of  Samson  with  Christ, 
are  very  ingenious ;  and  the  pure  and  elevated  dis- 
position they  manifest  therein,  finding  spirit  be- 
cause they  seek  it,  is  greatly  to  be  admired.  A 
wood-carving  over  thp  choir-chairs  in  the  Maul- 
bronn  monastery  represents  Samson  with  long 
waving  hair,  riding  on  the  lion,  the  symbol  of 
death,  whose  jaws  he  tears  apart;  while,  on  the 
opposite  side,  the  unicorn  lies  in  the  lap  of  the 
Virgin,  —  together  symbolizing  the  birth  and  resur- 
rection of  Christ.  For  to  him  applies  the  saying 
of  the  Apostle  (Heb.  xi.  32,  33),  that  by  faith  he 
stopped  the  mouths  of  lions. 

It  is  worthy  of  mention  that  while  the  names  of 
the  other  Judges,  Othniel,  Ehud,  Barak,  Gideon, 
Jephthah,  scarcely  ever  recur  among  the  Jews,  that 
of  Samson  was  frequently  used,  both  anciently  and 
in  modern  times. 

In  the  address  of  Samuel  (1  Sam.  xii.  11),  the 
name  of  a  hero  Bedan  is  inserted  between  Jerubbaal 
and  Jephthah,  who  can  be  none  other  than  Samson. 
The  reading  BapaK  of  the  LXX.  is  without  any 
probability  in  its  favor.  Bedan  is  Ben  Dan  (liter- 
ally. •■  Son  of  Dan"),  i.  e..  "the  Danite."  The 
familiar  use  of  this  name  in  honor  of  the  tribe,  was 
undoubtedly  connected  with  the  blessing  of  Jacob 
on  Dan,  which  after  the  life  of  Samson  must  have 
seemed  to  have  special  reference  to  him:  "Dan 
shall  judge  his  people,  as  one  of  the  tribes  of  Is- 
rael." The  primitive  consciousness  of  the  prophecy 
of  Jacob  reveals  itself  herein  ;  and  nowhere  could 
it  be  said  with  more  profound  significance  than 
here,  —  "I  wait  for  thy  salvation,  0  Jehovah" 
(Gen.  xlix.  18). 


HOMJXETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

Samson,  having  found  his  God  again,  died  as  a 
hero.  His  brethren  carried  him  into  his  father's 
grave.  His  victory  was  greater  in  death  than  in 
life. 

Ancient  expositors  compare  his  death  with  that 
of  Christ.  But  Samson  gave  up  his  life  in  order 
to  cause  his  enemies  to  die  :  Christ  in  order  to  give 
them  life.  Samson  died  gladly  because  he  had 
found  his  God  again;  in  Christ  God  was  never 
lost.  It  is,  however,  a  good  death,  when  one  seea 
himself  restored  to  communion  with  God.  If  the 
Christian,  in  the  last  brief  hour  of  the  cross,  holds 
fast  his  faith,  the  thousand  foes  let  loose  against 

8  If  indeed  Samson  be  meant.    Cf.  Raynandi,  Tirull  Cm 
tus  Lugduti'Hsis,  Works,  viii.  571. 
4  Cf.  Bayle,  Diet.  iii.  2658. 


226 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


him  by  sin  and  temptation  fall  before  him.  When 
a  Christian  suffers,  the  representatives  of  evil  place 
themselves  round  about  him  with  laughter  and 
mockery ;  and  if  he  endures,  his  victory  in  death  is 
greater  than  in  life.  Strong  as  Samson,  was  the 
weak  woman  Perpetua  (in  the  second  century) ;  in 
the  midst  of  tortures  she  said,  "  I  know  that  I  suf- 
fer, but  I  am  a  Christian."  Thousands  of  martyrs 
have  died  as  Samson  died.  They  have  conquered 
through  the  cross,  and  have  heaped  mountains  of 
dishonor  nnon  their  enemies.  But  they  were  not 
all  buried  by  their  brethren.  They  found  no  places 
in  their  fathers'  graves.  Only  He  from  whom 
nothing  is  hidden  knows  where  they  lie.  At  the 
last  day  they  shall  rise,  and  the  eyes  of  them  all 
shall  be  free  from  tears.  Samson  was  alone ;  he 
also  died  alone.  For  his  people  he  fought  alone 
and  suffered  alone.  After  his  death,  the  tribe  of 
Judah  raised  itself  again  to  faith.  The  remem- 
brance of  Samson  preceded  the  deeds  of  David. 
Let  no  one  fear  to  stand  alone,  whether  in  suffer- 
ing or  in  conflict.  The  words  of  a  faithful  heart  are 
not  spoken  in  vain.  The  seed  falls,  not  into  the 
blue  sky,  but  into  God's  living  kingdom,  and  in  its 
spring  time  will  surely  rise. 


Starke  :  The  eyes  of  the  mind  are  better  than 
the  eyes  of  the  body.  We  can  better  spare  the 
latter  than  the  former.  —  The  same  :  For  God  and 
native  land  life  itself  is  not  to  be  accounted  dear 
but  should  gladly  be  surrendered ;  and  he  alone 
who  does  this  is  truly  entitled  to  the  name  of  a 
valiant  hero.  Thus,  also,  didst  thou,  O  Saviour, 
our  better  Samson,  conquer  in  dying.  —  Gerlach  . 
Samson  sported  before  the  Philistines,  not  as  one 
who,  fallen  from  a  merely  human  height,  endeavors 
with  smiling  scorn  to  maintain  his  self-conscious- 
ness amid  the  downfall  of  the  perishable  thing* 
of  this  world,  but  deeply  impressed  with  the  vanity 
of  everything  that  seeks  to  set  itself  up  against  the 
Lord  —  of  "  the  vain  war  of  the  earthen  pots 
against  the  rock  "  of  which  Luther  speaks  —  and 
therefore  seizing  with  faith  on  the  renewed  prom- 
ises of  divine  grace.  —  The  Same:  He  becomes 
thoroughly  convinced  that,  mutilated  in  his  face, 
he  could  never  again  live  among  men,  exposed  to 
the  scorn  of  the  enemies  of  the  Lord,  and  that 
therefore  his  work  is  done  ;  his  play  is  turned  into 
bitter  earnestness,  and  while  he  falls  and  dies,  he 
gains  the  greatest  victory  of  his  whole  life. 


PAKT  THIRD. 

The  conclusion  of  the  Book,  tracing  the  evils  of  the  period,  the  decay  of  the  priert- 
hood,  the  self-will  of  individuals,  and  the  prevalence  of  licentiousness,  passion,  and  di*- 
cord,  to  the  absence  of  a  fixed  and  permanent  form  of  government. 


FIRST   SECTION. 


THE   HI9TORT  OF   MICAH's   PRIVATE   TEMPLE  ANT)   IMAGE-WORSHIP  :   SHOWING   THE  INDIVIDUAL 

ARBITRARINESS  OF  THE    TIMES,   AND  ITS  TENDENCY   TO  SUBVERT  AND   CORRUPT   THE 

RELIGIOUS   INSTITUTIONS  OF  ISRAEL. 


Micah,  a  man  of  Mount  Ephraim,  sets  up  a  private  sanctuary  and  engages  a  wan* 

dering  Levite  to  be  his  Priest. 

Chapter  XVII.  1-13. 


1  And  there  was  a  man  of  Mount  Ephraim,  whose  name  was  Micah  [Micayehu]. 

2  And  he  said  unto  his  mother,  The  eleven  hundred  shekels  of  silver  that  were  taken 
from  thee,1  about  which  thou  cursedst,  and  spakest  of  also  in  mine  ears,  behold,  the 
silver  is  with  me ;  I  took  it.     And  his  mother  said,  Blessed  be  thou  of  the  Lord 

3  [Jehovah],  my  son.  And  when  he  had  [And  he]  restored  the  eleven  hundred 
shekels  of  silver  to  his  mother,  [and]  his  mother  said,  I  had  wholly  dedicated  2  the 
silver  unto  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  from  my  hand  for  my  son,  to  make  a  graven  image 

4  and  a  molten  image : 8  now  therefore  I  will  restore  it  unto  thee.  Yet  [And]  he 
restored  the  money  [silver]  unto  his  mother  ;  and  his  mother  took  two  hundred 
shekels  of  silver,  and  gave  them  to  the  founder,  who  made  thereof  a  graven  image 


CHAPTER   XVII.   1-13. 


221 


5  and  a  molten  image  :  and  they  were  in  the  house  of  Micah  [Micayehu].     And 

the  man  Micah  had  an  house  of  gods  [a  "Beth  Eiohim,"  God's-house],  and  made  an  ephod, 
and  teraphim,  and  consecrated  [appointed]  one  of  his  sons,  who  [and  he]  became 

6  his  priest.    In  those  days  there  was  no  king  in  Israel,  but  every  man  did  that  which 

7  was  right  in  his  own  eyes.     And  there  was  a  young  man  out  of  Beth-lehem-judah 
of  the   family   of  Judah,  who   was  a  Levite,  and   he  sojourned  there  [temporarily]. 

8  And  the  man  departed  out  of  the  city  from  [out  of]   Beth-lehem-judah,  to  sojourn 
where  he  could  find  a  place :  and   he   came  to  mount  Ephraim   to  the  house  of 

9  Micah,  as  he  journeyed.     And  Micah  said  unto  him,  Whence  comest  thou  ?     And 
he  said  unto  him,  I  am  a  Levite  of  Beth-lehem-judah,  and  I  go  to  sojourn  where  I 

10  may  find  a  place.  And  Micah  said  unto  him,  Dwell  [Abide]  with  me,  and  be  unto 
me  a  father  and  a  priest,  and  I  will  give  thee  ten  shekels  of  silver  by  the  year,  and 

11  a  suit  of  apparel,  and  thy  victuals.  So  the  Levite  went  in.  And  the  Levite  was 
content  [consented]  to  dwell  with  the  man,  and  the  young  man  was  [became]  unto 

12  him  as  one  of  his  sons.     And  Micah  consecrated  [appointed]  the  Levite;  and  the 

13  young  man  became  his  priest,  and  was  in  the  house  of  Micah.  Then  said  Micah, 
Now  know  I  that  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  will  do  me  good,  seeing  I  have  a  Levite  to 
[seeing  the  Levite  has  become]  my  priest. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

p  Ver.  2 T[b  npb  ~>t£?W.    ?jb  18  the  dot.  incommodi.     Strictly  Bpeaking,  7  simply  marks  some  sort  of  rel»- 

tton,  Che  exact  nature  of"  which  must  be  otherwise  determined.  The  present  phrase,  rendered  as  literally  as  possible,  If : 
•'which  (sc.  PIPS)  was  taken  for  thee,"  cf.  oar  popular  use  of  the  same  phrase,  and  the  German,  welchts  dir  gtnom- 
ttun  ward.  Ewald  (who  with  characteristic  self-confldence  announces  that  he  must  leave  the  "  silly  absurdity  "  of  the 
krdinary  explanation  of  this  passage  "  to  those  who  do  not  hesitate  to  find  their  own  folly  in  the  Bible,")  seems  to 
take  Tib  as  the  dative  of  the  author:  the  money  taken  (received)  by  thee  from  my  fiither.  For  he  relates,  quite  in 
historical  style,  that  a  young  man  of  Mount  Ephraim,  whose  father  probably  died  early,  took  the  money  which  had  been 
left  to  his  mother  into  his  own  hands,  in  order  by  using  to  increase  it  (!) ;  and  that,  followed  by  his  mother's  blessing, 
he  was  fortunate,  and  was  about  to  restore  the  money  to  her,  as  became  a  dutiful  son,  when  she  made  him  a  present  of 
It  in  the  shape  of  a  handsome  (schmuckcn)  god,  etc.  The  perfect  '.Fini??,  he  says,  is  the  perfect  of  volition  (lik« 
^WE^pi"!  ver.  8):  "I  will  take;  it  is  my  will  to  take."  But  if  the  Hebrew  author  meant  to  tell  this  story,  he  ex- 
pressed himself  very  obscurely.  The  imprecatory  oath,  too,  is  thus  left  without  explanation.  And  notwithstanding  all 
Kwald"s  efforts  in  behalf  of  him,  Micah  is  still  in  suspicious  possession  of  the  money  ('"FIN  HP?^  T?'"')>  before  h* 
tells  his  mother  that  he  will  take  it.  Under  such  circumstances,  the  benediction  which,  according  to  Ewald,  the  mother 
pronounces  on  her  son,  might  be  more  politic  than  free.  — Tb.] 

[2  Ver.  3.  —  ^nEJ^pn  EJ^pn.  Render  :  «  I  verily  dedicate."  Although  Dr.  Cassel  also  translates  here  by  the 
pluperfect,  he  explains  it  of  the  present,  see  below.  Ou  this  use  of  the  perfect  cf.  Ges.  Gram.  126,4.  The  word 
"  wholly  "  of  the  E.  V.  is  better  omitted.  The  infln.  absolute  in  this  construction  is  intensive,  not  extensive.  It  doM 
not  assert  the  completeness  of  the  consecration,  but  simply  makes  it  prominent,  as  being  the  use  to  which  she  determine 
to  put  the  money.    Cf.  Ges.  131,  8  —  Ttt] 

[«  Ver.  3.  —  rOSIC1!  bDQ.  Dr.  Cassel :  Bild  vnd  Gusswerlc,  "  image  and  cast-work  "  ;  i.  c,  an  image  of  wood  or 
stone  covered  with  a  thin  coating  of  silver  or  gold,  see  below.  This  explanation,  although  concurred  in  by  several 
critics,  is  not  yet  sufficiently  certain  to  make  it  worth  while  to  disfigure  our  English  text  by  Inserting  it.  — Til.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

After  the  story  of  Samson's  heroic  life  and  death, 
there  follow  in  conclusion  two  narratives,  of  which 
the  first  embraces  chaps,  xvii.  and  xviii.,  the  second 
chaps,  xix.-xxi.  Though  not  connected  with  each 
other  either  by  time  or  place,  they  are  nevertheless 
not  mere  accidental  appendages  to  the  preceding 
historical  narrative,  but  essential  parts  of  the  well- 
considered  organism  of  the  entire  Book,  in  conse- 
quence of  which  also  they  received  the  position  in 
which  we  find  them.  The  profound  pragmatism 
of  the  Book  (see  Introduction,  sect.  1 )  designs  to 
show,  that  the  heroic  period  of  the  Judges  is  full 
indeed  of  the  wonders  of  God's  compassion,  but 
lacks  that  organic  centralization  and  unity  which 
only  the  kingly  office,  rightly  instituted  and'  rightly 
exercised,  couid  afford.  This  want  manifested  it- 
self even  under  the  greatest  Judges.  The  influ- 
ence of  the  Judge  extended,  for  the  most   part, 


only  over  the  individual  tribes  to  which  he  be 
longed,  while  in  others  it  was  not  seldom  resisted ; 
and,  being  wholly  personal  in  its  nature,  disap- 
peared from  his  house  as  soon  as  he  died. 

In  chaps,  xvii.  and  xviii.  another  lesson  is 
brought  forward,  hints  of  which  had  already  oc- 
curred in  earlier  parts  of  the  Book.  The  religious 
central  point  of  the  nation,  also,  became  unsettled. 
And  this  was  the  greater  danger.  The  sanctuary 
at  Shiloh,  the  law  and  covenant  of  God  that  were 
in  the  sacred  ark,  were  the  real  pillars  of  Israel's 
nationality.  The  existence  of  this  spiritual  unity 
was  brought  out  in  the  opening  sentence  of  the 
Book :  "  And  after  the  death  of  Joshua,  the  sons 
of  Israel  asked  Jehovah."  It  had  in  dark  times 
demonstrated  itself  to  be  the  guaranty  of  national 
cohesion.  The  tribes  were  twelve,  indeed,  and  theif 
cities  lay  scattered  from  Beer-sheba  to  the  sources 
of  the  Jordan ;  but  there  was  but  one  sanctuary 
where  the  God  of  Israel  was  inquired  of.     It  aD 


228 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


peared,  however,  that  the  long-continued  want  of 
a  e!o-er  political  organization,  threatened  also  the 
unity  of  the  religious  organism.  For  not  only 
was  "the  service  of  foreign  idols  introduced,  threat- 
ening the  nerve  of  popular  strength  and  national 
freedom,  but  subjective  superstition,  also,  and  in- 
considerate division,  asserted  themselves  within  the 
religious  organization.  This  is  shown  by  the  story 
of  Micah's  sanctuary. 

Ver.  1 .  And  there  was  a  man  of  mount  Eph- 
raim,  and  bis  name  was  Micayehu.  Avarice, 
the  Apostle  tells  us,  is  the  root  of  all  evil.  Covet- 
ousness,  like  all  sin,  knows  no  shame.  Its  lustful 
eyes  profane  even  that  which  is  holy.  The  treas- 
ures of  temples  have  ever  excited  the  rapacity  of 
savage  enemies.  The  gifts  of  the  pious  convert 
houses  of  prayer  into  objects  of  envy.  Faithful 
Israelites,  who  believed  in  Jehovah,  went  to  Shi- 
loh,  in  Ephraim,  performed  there  their  pious  duties, 
inquired  of  God  after  truth,  prayed,  and  brought 
their  offerings  for  the  honor  and  maintenance  of 
the  house  of  God.  Among  those  who  did  this, 
was  doubtkss  also  the  father  of  Micayehu.  For 
that  he  confessed  Jehovah,   is   evident   from   the 

name  which  he  gave  to  his  son :  in^S'D,  "  who  is 
like  Jehovah."  Such  names  are  only  given  in 
homes  where  Jehovah  is  honored,  at  least  in  ap- 
pearance. The  mere  fact,  however,  that  persons 
are  named  "Theodore,"1  "Nathaniel,"  "  Theophi- 
lus,"  or  other  like  names,  gives  no  assurance  that 
they  are  what  their  names  declare  them  to  be. 
The  father  of  Micayehu  must  also  have  been  rich  ; 
for  he  left  his  widow  large  sums  of  money.  The 
latter,  according  to  all  appearances,  was  avaric- 
ious ;  and  it  was  probably  on  this  account  that 
true  faith  in  Jehovah  took  no  root  in  her  heart, 
although  the  name  of  Jehovah  was  often  on  her 
lips. 

Vers.  2,  3.  Behold,  here  is  the  money ;  I  took 
it.  The  rich  woman  had  been  deprived  of  a  large 
sum  of  money.  Eleven  hundred  shekels,  at  that 
time,  evidently  represented  a  very  considerable 
amount ;  large  enough  to  be  spoken  of  in  "  round 
figures."  The  woman  was  beside  herself;  her  soul 
was  in  her  money :  and  so  she  cursed  the  thief. 
Cursing  is  still  a  frightful  oriental  custom.  It  was 
regarded  as  an  invocation  of  judgments  from 
heaven.  Hence,  the  dread  of  the  effects  of  curses, 
in  heathenism,  arose  not  only  from  faith,  but  still 
more  from  superstition.  The  sin  was  indeed  en- 
gaged in,  but  the  curse  was  dreaded ;  just  as  other 
thieves  do  not  refrain  from  stealing,  but  guard 
themselves  anxiously  against  the  police.  To  this 
must  be  added  that  parental  curses  were  feared  as 
the  heaviest  of  all  bans  (among  the  Greeks  cf. 
Nagelsbach,  Nachhom.  TheoL,  p.  350).  Sirach  (iii. 
9)  still  said  in  his  day,  that  "  the  curse  of  a  mother 
overturns  the  houses  of  children."  Micah  heard 
the  awful  imprecations  of  his  mother's  maledic- 
tion, and  shuddered.  He  could  not  say,  "a  cause- 
less curse  takes  no  effect"  (Prov.  xxvi.  2).  He 
had  taken  the  money,  which  was  now  charged 
with  his  mother's  curses.  With  these  he  will  not 
have  it.  "  Here  is  your  money  back,"  he  says; 
"  I  took  it."     As  one  shakes  off  rain,  so  he  would 

1  The  priest  who  subsequently  entered  the  service  of 
Micah,  was  named  "Jonathan/'  i.  e.,  Theodore.  See  at 
lb.  xviii    80. 

2  Bertheau  assumes  that  the  mother  devoted  the  money 
to  this  purpose,  inasmuch  as  her  son  had  already  a  Betk 
Elntiim.  But  it  was  only  the  image  that  could  make  any 
house  a  "  House  of  God.*'  It  is  certainly  more  natural  to 
luppose  that,  when  he  utterly  refused  to  accept  the  money, 


free  himself  of  this  curse-laden  money.  "  It  is  thj 
son,"  he  says,  "  and  his  house,  whom  thou  has 
cursed.  Take  the  money  —  I  do  no-;  wish  it.' 
His  words,  so  far  as  we  can  see,  express  more  of 
reproach  than  of  consciousness  of  guilt.  And  the 
mother  resembles  those  people  of  whom  Janus 
says  (ch.  iii.  10) :  "  Out  of  the  same  mouth  pro- 
ceedeth  blessing  and  cursing."  She  had  cursed,  in 
inconsiderate  wrath,  and  without  investigation,  on 
account  of  her  lost  money.  That  being  recovered, 
she  will  save  her  sou  from  the  effects  of  her  male- 
diction. As  if  blessing  and  curse  were  under  hu 
man  control,  she  exclaims  :  "  Blessed  be  thou,  my 
son,  unto  Jehovah." 

The  son  was  in  any  case  wrong  in  taking  the 
money  secretly.  The  purpose  for  which  he  took 
it,  seems  to  be  indicated  by  the  context  and  the 
speech  of  the  mother.  He  wished  it  for  the  pur- 
pose which  he  afterwards  carried  out.  This  also 
explains  sufficiently  why  he  took  it  secretly :  he 
probably  did  not  believe  that  his  mother  would 
approve  his  design.  For  the  preparation  of  pesa 
and  massekah,  an  image  and  cast-work,  for  the 
purpose  he  had  in  view,  was  itself  a  theft,  notwith- 
standing that  it  looked  like  an  act  of  service  to 
God.  But  it  turned  out  differently.  It  was  nat- 
ural that  his  mother  should  ask  for  what  purpose 
he  had  taken  it ;  and  he  replies  that  he  had  des- 
tined it  for  Jehovah,  to  tit  out  a  private  sanctuary 
with  an  image  and  cast-work.  The  mother,  in 
order  to  appease  him,  says  :  then  do  I  consecrate 
it  for  Jehovah,  from  my  hand  for  my  son  (the  for- 
mula of  dedication),  that  he  may  make  an  "  image 
and  cast-work  ; "  -  now  therefore  take  the  money. 
Hereupon  there  arises  a  genuine  contest  of  super- 
stition. He  is  now  afraid  of  the  curse-laden  money. 
And  she  is  in  dread  lest  the  frustration  of  the  seem- 
ingly religious  end  for  which  her  son  intended  to 
use  it,  should  fall  back  upon  herself.  He  has  ex- 
cused his  theft  with  the  word  "  Jehovah ; "  and  she 
seeks  to  cover  up  her  curse  with  it.  Superstition 
thus  shows  itself  to  be  the  worst  profanation,  trans- 
muting eternal  truth  into  subjective  personal  in- 
terest. 

Ver.  4.  And  his  mother  took  two  hundred 
shekels  of  silver.  Micah  had  once  more  refused 
the  money.  He  still  fears  the  curse  that  it  may 
bring  with  it.  Thereupon  the  mother  causes  the 
"image  and  cast-work"  to  be  made;  applying, 
however,  not  1,100  shekels,  but  only  200.  This 
shows  that  it  was  only  avarice,  and  not  the  fact 
that  she  had  dedicated  the  money  to  religious  pur- 
poses, that  had  inspired  her  curse.  For  even  now 
she  cannot  part  with  more  than  200  shekels  out 
of  the  1,100.  On  the  other  hand,  it  becomes  evi- 
dent that  the  purpose  for  which  Micah  took  the 
money  was  the  manufacture  of  the  image ;  for  it 
is  set  up  "  in  his  house,"  and  he  combines  with  it 
still  other  operations. 

Ver.  5.  And  he  set  up  an  ephod  and  tera- 
phim.  These  words  give  the  key  to  the  whole 
transaction,  and  even  aflbrd  a  clew  to  the  time  in 
which  it  took  place.  The  paternal  house  of  Micah, 
it  appears,  had  not  openly  broken  with  the  service 
of  Jehovah.  This  is  clear  from  both  his  and  his 
mother's  words  (vers.  2,  3,  13).     But  their  hearts 

ehe  took  it  upon  herself  to  provide  the  image  with  the 
money  in  question,  in  order  to  deliver  him  from  the  curse. 
She  can  have  come  to  this  nse  of  the  money,  only  becaus* 
he  gave  it  as  the  object  for  which  he  took  it.  The  mothel 
applies  only  two  hundred  shekels  ;  the  opinion  that  thi 
others  were  used  by  way  <  <  endowment  is  at  least  not  in- 
dicated in  the  text. 


CHAPTER  XVII.     1-13. 


22£ 


were  not  wholly  with  God.  This  is  evident  from 
her  avarice  and  malediction.  Theirs  was  not  a 
house  in  which  the  Canaanitish  Baal  was  sacri- 
ficed to ;  but  neither  was  it  one  in  which  there  was 
more  of  true  religion  than  the  form  and  name. 
In  the  h>  mse  of  Joash  there  stood,  before  Gideon 
destroyed  it,  an  altar  of  Baal  and  an  Asherah. 
That  was  not  the  case  here.  But  selfishness  and 
superstitious  egoism  are  idolatrous  in  their  nature 
and  consequences,  even  when  Jehovah,  that  is,  the 
God  of  Israel,  is  still  spoken  of.  What  R.  juda 
Halle vi1  says  of  Micah  and  others,  applies  espe- 
cially to  him  :  "  He  resembles  a  man  who,  while 
ineestuously  marrying  his  sister,  should  strictly 
observe  the  customary  laws  of  marriage."  He 
makes  use  of  the  name  of  God,  but  for  that  which 

is  vanity  (Klt&v,  Ex.  xx.  7).  "He  made  an 
ephod."  The  sin  of  which  he  was  thus  guilty, 
lay  not  in  the  ephod,  but  in  the  fact  that  he  set  it 
np.  The  ephod  was  designed  for  the  lawful  priest- 
Dood.  The  Urim  and  Thummim  were  intended 
"or  Israel's  high-priests  (  Ex.  xxviii.  30),  in  order 
that  by  means  of  them  they  might  be  the  constant 
organ  of  objective  divine  wisdom  for  the  whole 
people,  at  the  place  where  they  served  before  God. 
Hence,  they  neither  could  nor  ought  to  serve  the 
subjective  interests  of  individual  men  or  tribes,  or 
be  inquired  of  anywhere  else  than  where  the  priest 
was  who  bore  them  on  his  heart.  This  fact  also 
renders  the  meaning  of  Judg.  viii.  27  clear,  where 
it  is  related  that  after  Gideon  had  set  up  an  ephod 
with  the  golden  booty  obtained  from  the  Midian- 
ites,  all  Israel  went  a-whoring  after  it,  and  found 
a  snare  in  it.  Gideon,  it  is  true,  served  Jehovah 
sincerely  and  truly,  and  meant  only  that  his  ephod 
should  serve  as  a  reminder  to  the  people  of  the 
wonderful  deeds  of  God ;  but  in  setting  it  up,  he 
nevertheless  introduced  a  precedent  which  sub- 
jective superstition  misused  to  its  own  hurt.  For, 
inasmuch  as  he  set  it  up  in  his  own  house,  he 
gave  occasion  for  others  to  think  that  they  also 
might  do  the  same  in  their  houses.  The  deeds  in 
consequence  of  which  he  instituted  the  ephod  were 
soon  lost  sight  of;  and  the  eye  was  directed  only 
to,  the  money  out  of  which  it  proceeded.  It  may 
be  assumed  that  precisely  for  Micah  Gideon's  ex- 
ample proved  a  source  of  danger,  —  for  which, 
however,  the  blame  falls  not  on  the  hero,  but  on 
Micah.  We  thus  obtain  a  clew  to  the  time  in 
which  the  event  here  related  occurred.  Micah  was 
a  man  of  Ephraim  who  lived  not  long  after  the 
days  of  Gideon.  There  was  pride  enough  in  Eph- 
raim to  arrogate  to  itself  the  right  of  doing  what 
was  done,  however  grandly  and  nobly,  in  the 
smaller  tribe  of  Manasseh.  It  is  at  all  times  the 
practice  of  paltry  selfishness  to  dishonor  the  ex- 
traordinary actions  of  great  men,  by  using  them  as 
cloaks  for  their  own  mean  ends.  Gideon  destroyed 
the  altar  of  Baal  secretly,  and  for  this  purpose 
made  use  of  his  father's  people  and  means  without 
his  father's  knowledge.  Micah  probably  excused 
himself  by  this  example,  when  he  secretly  took  his 
mother's  money,  in  order  to  set  up  that  which  in 
his  own  interest  he  destined  for  God. 

The  anarchy  of  arbitrary  individualism  exhibits 
itself  very  strikingly  here,  in  the  fact  that  a  mere 
common  man  (ti-,S  "'PPI,  ver.  1),  without  name 

1  JTtuari,  iv.  14,  ed.  Cassel,  p.  335. 

2  The  Talmud,  Sanhedrin,  103  b,  calls  the  name  of  the 

place  where  Micah  lived,  2"0,  and  puts  it  at  a  distance 
»f  three    7,,^2  f-om   Shiloh.     So  far  as  the  name  is  Con- 


or merit,  has  the  presumption  to  do  the  same  thing 
which  Gideon,  the  Judge  and  Deliverer  of  Israel, 
had  undertaken  to  do  ;  and  that  he  does  it  on  the 
same  mountains  of  Ephraim  on  which,  at  no 
great  distance,  in  Shiloh,  the  ark  of  God  and  the 
lawful  ephod  were  to  be  found.  R.  Nathan J 
thinks  that  the  places  were  so  near  to  each  other, 
that  the  smoke  from  both  sanctuaries  might  com- 
mingle, as  it  l'ose  upward.  A  mere  common  man, 
who  had  nothing  but  money,  presumed  to  found  a 
sanctuary,  with  an  ephod  and  a  priest,  and  to  pass 
this  off  as  an  oracle  of  Jehovah.  The  object  he  had 
in  view  can  hardly  have  been  any  other  than  to 
ensnare  the  people  who,  in  the  pressure  of  their  re- 
ligious needs,  sought  for  instruction,  and  brought 
votive  oft'erings  and  gifts.  For  this  purpose,  the 
house  which  he  founded  must  have  been  assimilated 
to  the  tabernacle  ;  yet  not  so  completely  as  to  be 
attractive  only  to  the  thoroughly  pious  worshippers 
of  Jehovah.  For  as  these  would  not  under  any  cir- 
cumstances visit  any  sanctuary  but  that  at  Shiloh, 
Micah's  house  would  then  have  failed  of  its  pur- 
pose. It  could  be  made  attractive  only  by  mak- 
ing it  minister  to  the  superstition  of  sensual 
worship,  and  by  vesting  this  ministry  in  the  forms 
of  the  service  of  Jehovah.  Hence  he  speaks  t£ 
consecration  to  Jehovah,  but  at  the  same  time  rep- 
resents the  latter  by  means  of  rODO^  bCS  (an 
image  and  cast-work).  He  set  up  an  ephod,  and 
supplemented  it  with  teraphim.  He  needed  a 
priest ;  and  in  the  absence  of  a  Levite,  he  himself 
selects  one  of  his  sons  for  the  office.  Every  part 
of  his  proceeding  is  thus  marked  by  subjective 
arbitrariness,  which  under  pious  names  concealed 
self-interest  and  superstition.  The  narrator  strik- 
ingly points  out  this  his  sin,  by  means  of  a  few  deli- 
cate strokes.  Hitherto  the  man  had  always  been 
called  Micayehu,  distinctly  bearing  the  name  of 
Jehovah.  But  from  ver.  5,  where  he  sets  up  his 
sanctuary,  onward,  he  is  only  spoken  of  as  Micah. 
The  name  of  God  was  not  to  be  desecrated  in  him. 
And  although  Micab  speaks  of  "  Jehovah  "  (v.  13), 
his  house  is  only  called  a  Beth  Elohim,  —  a  name 
also  given  to  the  temples  of  heathen  deities,  —  not 
Beth  Jehovah,  house  of  Jehovah.  No  description 
is  given  of  what  the  goldsmith  shaped  out  of  the 
mother's  two  hundred  pieces  of  money ;  but  it  is 

called  ""^uD&T  ;!??,  an  image  and  cast-work. 
These  words  at  the  same  time  pronounce  judg- 
ment against  the  sin  that  had  been  committed,  for 
they  are  the  technical  expressions  under  which  the 
law  forbids  the  making  of  every  kind  of  image- 
work  for  idolatrous  purposes.  The  narrator  has 
his  eye  doubtless  on  Deut.  xxvii.  15:  "Cursed 
O^TK)  is   the  man  that  maketh  HDEa^  bDS, 

an  abomination  unto  Jehovah,  the  work  of  the 
hands  of  the  artificer."  He  intimates,  assuredly, 
that  the  same  man  who  stood  in  such  dread  of  his 
mother's  curse  on  the  thief  of  her  money,  ren- 
dered himself  obnoxious  to  the  more  awful  curse  of 
the  divine  law,  when  he  desired,  or  at  any  rate  ac- 
cepted, such  image-work.  The  form  of  the  image 
cannot,  however,  be  determined  with  certainty. 
The  opinion  that  it  represented  a  calf,  is  certainly 
not  tenable.  It  is  not  true  that  Jehovah,  the  God 
of  Israel,  was  ever  or  anywhere  represented  under 

cerned,  it  appears  to  be  only  a  name  of  reproach,  with  a 
reference  to  Deut.  xxviii.  27 ;  Lev.  xxi.  20.     In  Pesachim 

117  a,  the  place  seems  to  be  named  >D2  [flctus,  ploratu&\ 
probably  in  pursuance  of  a  similar  homiletical  explanatiro 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES 


the  figure  of  a  bull  or  calf.  On  the  contrary,  this 
figure  was  symbolical  of  a  contrast,  a  national  and 
historical  contrast,  with  Jehovah.  This  appears 
both  from  the  golden  calf  of  the  desert  and  from  the 
history  of  Jeroboam.1  To  infer  from  the  analogy 
of  the  latter,  that  Micah  also  cast  a  calf,  would 
likewise  be  erroneous.  For  Micah's  act  has  no 
national,  but  only  a  religious  significance.  He 
does  not  intend  to  set  up  a  contrast  to  Jehovah, 
but  only  a  superstitious  syncretism  with  other 
sanctuaries.  Had  the  image  been  a  calf,  the  nar- 
rator would  have  taken  occasion  to  say  so  ;  for 
that  of  itself,  in  its  relation  to  the  idolatry  of  the 
desert,  would  have  indicated  the  nature  of  Micah's 
sin.  Since  it  must  be  assumed  that  Micah  in- 
tended to  establish  a  sort  of  tabernacle,  it  is  to  be 
supposed  that  in  his  image-work  also  he  carried 
out  this  imitation  to  the  extreme  of  superstition. 

In  the  tabernacle,  on  the  riHSS  ["mercy-seat"] 
there  were  two  cherubim,  witli  outspread  wings ; 
and  in  Ex.  xxv.  22,  God  says :  "  I  will  speak  with 
thee  from  upon  the  happoreth  [mercy -seat] ,  from 
between  the  two  cherubim."  Now,  if  Micah, 
while  in  general  imitating  this  arrangement,  trans- 
formed the  cherubim  into  sphinx-like  figures,  such 
as  were  found  in  Egyptian  temples,  and  sym- 
bolyzed  (as  Clem.  Alex.,  Strom,  lib.  v.  ch.  5,  well 
explains.)  the  mysterious  problems  concerning  the 
Deity,  which  received  their  solution  at  the  hands 
of  the  priests,  he  would  at  the  same  time  minister 
to  the  superstition  of  the  time.  And  it  was  espe- 
cially the  establishment  of  an  oracle  that  Micah 

had  in  view.  The  verb  ^?S  means  to  cut,  to 
chisel,  especially  in  wood,  to  carve ;  for  the  image, 
T>DQ,  can  be  burnt   (Deut.  vii.  5,  25),  or  sawed 

in  pieces  (Deut.  xii.  3).  H3D13  is  the  coating  of 
gold  with  which  the  image  was  covered  (cf.  Ewald, 
Alterthtlmer,  p.  256,  2d  edit.),  and  is  therefore 
oftenest  mentioned  in  connection  with  pesel,  but 
frequently  also  without  it.  Such  wooden  images 
(called  (6ava,  by  the  Greeks),  says  K.  0.  Muller 
{Archaologie,  §  69),  were  adorned  with  chaplets 
and  diadems,  neck-chains,  and  ear-pendants.  To 
this  the  lawgiver  refers,  when  he  says  (Deut.  vii. 
25)  :  "The  images  of  their  gods  ye  shall  burn 
with  fire  ;  thou  shalt  not  desire  the  silver  or  gold 
that  is  on  them."  Beside  the  ephod  Micah  also 
made  teraphim.  This  addition  shows  that  he  de- 
signed the  ephod  for  divining  purposes.  The  sub- 
ject of  the  teraphim  has  hitherto  remained  envel- 
oped in  a  great  deal  of  obscurity.  From  Ezek.  xxi. 
26  (21),  2  Kgs.  xxiii.  24,  and  Hos.  iii.  4,  (cf.  also 
1  Sam.  xv.  23),  it  is  certain  that  they  were  con- 
sulted, like  oracles.  They  were  shaped  like  human 
beings,  see  1  Sam.  xix.  13  ;  and  they  were  small, 
otherwise  Rachel  could  not  have  concealed  them 
(Gen.  xxxi.  34).  Antiquity  conceived  of  every  thing 
connected  with  divination  as  wrapped  in  dark- 
ness and  mystery.  The  heathen  oracle  issued  out 
of  the  depth  and  darkness  in  enigmatic  language. 

1  Cf  my  treatise,  Jeroboam,  Erf.  1856.  Unfortunately, 
Keil  also  thinks  that  this  opinion  is  f[  scarcely  to  he 
doubted,"  although  he  adduces  no  grounds  for  it.    For  that 

the  term  /3j7,  in  Ex.  xxxii.  4,  Is  also  followed  by 
n  3DD,  is  as  natural  as  it  is  that  this  latter  word  is  always 

annul  whenever  cast  images  are  spoken  of.  Cf.  Ex.  xxxiv. 
17.  The  error  is  so  widespread  that  it  has  even  found  a 
place  in  the  reply  of  Thomas  ( Union,  Kath.  Eirehe,  p.  40), 
to  SUihl'a  book  on  "  Union."      [On  this   question  of  the 


At  Megara,  there  was  an  oracle  of  the  goddesi 
Night,  represented  as  a  high  and  closely  veiled 
figure.  The  little  teraphim  also  must  have  borno 
about  them  tokens  of  their  mysterious  nature. 
We  may  venture  to  recognize  them  in  the  little 
shapes  of  Greek  art,  enveloped  in  a  thick  mantle 
and  hat,  who  constantly  accompany  the  figures  of 
^Esculapius,  the  divining  god  of  the  healing  art 
(where  also  the  tablets  usually  appear,  symbolic 
of  the  responses  of  the  god.  Muller,  Archiiol.,  §  394, 
1).  Among  the  various  names  given  to  these 
attendant  figures  by  the  Greeks,  is  that  of  Teles- 
phoros,  end-bringing.2  It  is  well  known  that  ora- 
cles were  most  frequently  consulted  with  reference 
to  physical  ailments.  In  Israel,  also,  in  days  of 
apostacy,  idols  were  applied  to  for  healing  (3 
Kgs.  i.  2).  The  teraphim,  accordingly,  appear  to 
represent  oracles  of  healing.  Their  name,  at  all 
events,  teraphim  (trophim),  approximates  closely 
to  that  of  Trophonius,3  for  which  also  the  Greek 
language  affords  no  suitable  etymology.  Tropho- 
nius  is  the  healing  oracle,  who  delivered  his  re- 
sponses in  a  dark  chasm,  and  who,  like  iEscula- 
pius,  is  represented  with  a  serpent,  from  which  he 

probably  derived  bis  name  (cf.  Fl'?'?^  The  relation- 
ship of  teraphim  and  "  seraphim  "  is  plain  enough. 
The  serpent-divination  of  Greece  is  manifestly  of 
Asiatic  origin.  That  the  Israelites  offered  incense 
to  the  healing  serpent  erected  by  Moses,  we  learn 
from  the  history  of  Hezekiah,  who  destroyed  it 
(2  Kgs.  xviii.  4).  The  teraphim,  then,  explain 
themselves  and  some  other  matters,  when  we  re- 
gard them  as  Telesphoroi,  possessed  of  oracular 
healing  attributes.  Every  passage  in  which  they 
appear  is  in  this  way  fully  explained. 

Ver.  6.  In  those  days  there  was  no  king  in 
Israel.  There  was  no  central  civil  authority,  that 
could  interpose  against  sin  and  its  seductive  arts. 
The  sentence  teaches  that  in  Israel  it  was  consid- 
ered the  office  of  the  king,  not  to  allow  such  arbi- 
trariness and  sin  as  those  of  Micah  to  assert  them- 
selves. It  was  regarded  as  a  mark  of  anarchy, 
when,  alongside  of  the  sanctuary  at  Shiloh,  a 
common  man  took  it  upon  himself  to  seduce  the 
people  into  superstition.  It  must,  however,  be 
said,  that  even  though  the  worship  of  God  in  Shi- 
loh was  strong  enough  to  face  such  dangers,  it 
is  nevertheless  presumptively  a  sign  of  weakness 
in  the  contemporary  ministers  of  that  worship,  that 
Micah  had  the  courage  to  do  as  he  did.  The  com- 
plaint of  our  verse  is  made,  because  in  reality 
Micah  sinned  against  the  very  foundations  of  the 
Mosaic  faith  and  law.  It  is  not  the  freedom  which 
permitted  a  man  to  have  a  chapel  of  his  own,  that 
is  lamented ;  but  the  license  which  enabled  him  to 
fit  out  an  idol-temple,  to  establish  an  oracle,  and 
arbitrarily  to  disfigure  the  genuine  national  cul- 
tus.  For  the  rest,  the  utterance  is  one  that  could 
be  made  only  when  the  kingly  office  was  either  ex- 
pected to  exhibit  or  had  exhibited,  its  efficiency  in 
protecting  the  law  in  its  purity.  It  was  possible 
only  until  the  most  flourishing  point  of  Solomon's 

meaning  of  calf-idols  in  Israel,  cf.  Smith's  Bible  Diction- 
ary, art.  "  Calf."  —  Ts.] 

2  It  is  only  by  the  gift  of  foretelling  limit  and  end,  from 
amid  concealment  and  mystery,  that  the  nature  and  sym- 
bol of  the  Telesphoroi  can  be  explained  ;  and  only  thus  nu 
can  a  connection  between  them  and  the  sages  of  telesphoria, 
of  which  Bockh  speaks,  be  allowed.  It  is  only  their  connec- 
tion with  the  teraphim  that  explains  both  these  and  them. 
This  fact  escaped  both  Preller  (Grieck.  Myth.,  i.  827)  and 
Welcker  (  Griech.  Myth.,  ii.  740). 

8  Whose  connection  with  Serapis  and  Saraph  is  to  be 
more  minutely  explained  elsewhere. 


CHAPTER    XVIII.  1-13. 


231 


reign,  and  probable  only  in  the  times  when  men 
were  seeking  a  king  to  remedy  the  prevalent  an- 
archy. 

Vers.  7-12.  And  there  was  a  Levite.  Micah 
probably  found  that  his  sanctuary  lacked  consid- 
eration, because  it  had  no  priest.  There  were 
priests  enough  in  Ephraim,  to  be  sure  ;  but  it 
would  seem  that  none  of  them  were  willing  to 
serve  him  —  which  redounds  to  their  honor.  As- 
sistance came  to  him,  however,  from  another 
quarter.      A  young  man,  who  according  to  rule 

was  settled  in  Judah  (rTTin*  nOStJpSa,  cf. 
Josh.  xxi.  4),  became  discontented  at  home,  and 
took  to  travelling  about,  after  the  manner  of  a 
scholar  in  the  Middle  Ages.  He  stopped  some 
time  in  Bethlehem,  but  left  that  place  also ;  and 
on  his  way  over  the  mountains  of  Ephraim,  he 
came  to  Micah.  The  position  of  Micah's  sanctu- 
ary must  have  been  a  favorable  one,  near  the  high- 
ways from  south  to  north  ;  for  the  Danites,  who 
came  from  Eshtaol  and  Zorah,  and  the  young 
Levite,  who  came  from  Bethlehem,  passed  by  it. 
Micah,  hearing  that  the  Levite  was  unengaged, 
proposed  to  him  to  take  service  with  himself.  The 
proposition  was  made  sufficiently  inviting.    The 

young  man  was  to  be  honored  as  "  a  father  "  (3^?, 
pater),  become  a  priest,  and  be  placed  in  good  cir- 
cumstances. Vanity,  and  the  offer  of  a  good  place 
led  the  young  Levite  astray,  —  and  he  was  not  the 
last  who  fell  thus.  He  forgot  who  he  was  (see  at 
ch.  xviii.  30),  and  whom  as  Levite  he  ought  to 

lerve,  and  consented  ( -^l*},  cf.  on  cb.  i.  27). 
Micah  took  him  in  with  great  joy ;  so  that,  even 
oeyond  his  promises,  he  received  him  as  "  one  of 


his  sons,"  —  an  expression  which  stands  in  sug- 
gestive contrast  with  Micah's  promise  to  regard 
him  "  as  a  father."  For  the  sake  of  money,  the 
Levite   submitted  to  be  "consecrated,  ordained,'' 

by  an  Ephraimite.  (The  words  "SI  TVftJ  sb?^] 
are  a  standing  expression  for  to  induct,  to  ordain 
The  expression  is  derived  (as  Ex.  xxix.  33  com 
pared  with  ver.  24  clearly  shows),  from  the  cere 
raony  of  laying  the  offerings  required  at  the  conse 

cration  of  a  priest  upon  his  hands,  "'IS   7??,    Ex. 

xxix.  24).  At  all  events,  Micah  valued  the  Leviti- 
cal  dignity  more  highly  than  the  Levite  himself 
did.  When  the  latter  had  entered  his  house,  he 
exclaimed  :  — 

Ver.  13.  Now  know  I  that  Jehovah  will  do 
me  good,  seeing  the  Levite  has  become  my 
priest.  These  words  indicate  most  strikingly,  the 
thorough  self-deception  of  the  man.  He  looks  for 
blessings  to  Jehovah,  against  whom  he  has  com- 
mitted the  mortal  sin  of  image-worship.  He  ex- 
pects these  blessings  on  account  of  a  Levite,  who 
did  wrong  when  he  allowed  himself  to  be  hired. 
He  who  sets  up  ephod  and  teraphim  for  the  en- 
lightenment of  others,  has  himself  so  little  insight 
into  the  spirit  of  truth  as  not  to  perceive  that  in 
the  falsehood  of  his  entire  establishment  its  down 

i  fall  is  already  assured.     Perhaps,  he  also  found 

'  pleasure  in  the  descent  of  his  Levite  (ch.  xviii.  30), 
although  it  ought  rather  to  have  frightened  him. 

I  But  self-love  blinds  him,  and  his  soiled  conscience 
builds  hopes  on  the  name  of  a  Levite,  whose  doings 
in  his  house  challenged  the  judgments   of  God. 

I  "  Now  know  I,"  he  exclaims.     He  will  soon  learn 

(  how  deceptive  this  knowing  is. 


The  tribe  of  Dan,  desirous  of  more  room,  despatches  explorers.     These,  after  spending 

a  night  near  Micah's  religious  establishment,  become  aware  of  its  existence, 

and  consult  its  oracle.    Proceeding,  they  find  at  Laish  an  inviting 

place,   easy   of  conquest.      They   return    home,   and   a 

colony  of  six  hundred  families  is  sent  out. 


Chapter   XVIII.  1-13. 

1  In  those  days  there  was  no  king  in  Israel :  and  in  those  days  the  tribe  of  the 
Danites  sought  them  an  inheritance  to  dwell  in ;  for  unto  that  day  all  their  [no] 
inheritance '  had  not   [omit :  not]  fallen  unto  them  among  the  tribes  of  Israel. 

2  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Dan  sent  of  their  family  five  men  from  their  coasts  [of 
their  whole  number],  men  of  valour,  from  Zorah,  and  from  Eshtaol,  to  spy  out  the 
land,  and  to  search  it ;  and  they  said  unto  them,  Go,  search  the  land :  who  when 
[and]  they  came  to  mount  Ephraim,  to  [as  far  as]  the  house  of  Micah,  [aud]  they 

3  lodged  there.  When  they  were  by  the  house  of  Micah,  they  knew  the  voice  2  of 
the  young  man  the  Levite :  and  they  turned  in  thither,  and  said  unto  him,  Who 
brought  thee  hither  ?  and  what  makest  [doest]  thou  in  this  place  ?  and  what  hast 

4  thou  here  ?     And  he  said  unto  them,  Thus  and  thus  dealeth  Micah  with  me,  and 

5  hath  [he]  hired  me,  and  I  am  [became]  his  priest.  And  they  said  unto  him,  Ask 
counsel,  we  pray  thee,  of  God,  that  we  may  know  whether  our  way  which  we  go 

6  shall  be  prosperous.    And  the  priest  said  unto  them,  Go  in  peace  :  before  the  Lord 

7  [Jehovah]  is  your  way  wherein  ye  go.  Then  the  five  men  departed,  and  came  to 
Laish,  and  saw  the  people  that  were  therein,  how  they  dwelt &  careless  [securely], 


232 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


after  the  manner  of  the  Zidonians,  quiet  and  secure  ;  and  there  was  no  magistrate 
[potentate]  in  the  land,  that  might  put  them  to  shame  [injure  them]  in  any  thing 
and  they  were  far  from  the  Zidonians,  and  had  no  business  with  any  man  [had  uc 

8  intercourse  with  other  men].     And  they  came  unto  their  brethren  to  Zorah  and  Eshtaol : 

9  and  their  brethren  said  unto  them,  What  say  ye  ?  And  they  said,  Arise,  that  we 
may  [and  let  us]  go  up  against  them :  for  we  have  seen  the  land,  and  behold,  it  is 
very  good :  and  are  ye  still  ?  be  not  slothful  to  go,  and  to  enter  [come]  to  possess 
the  land.  When  ye  go,  ye  shall  come  unto  a  people  secure,  and  to  a  large  land: 
for  God  hath  given  it  into  your  hands ;  a  place  where  there  is  no  want  of  any  thing 
that  is  in  the  earth  [land].  And  there  went  from  thence  of  the  family  of  the  Dan- 
ites,  out  of  Zorah  and  out  of  Eshtaol,  six  hundred  men  appointed  [girded]  with 

12  weapons  of  war.  And  they  went  up,  and  pitched  [encamped]  in  Kirjath-jearim,  in 
Judah:  wherefore  they  called  [call]  that  place  Mahaneh-dan  [Camp  of  Dan]  unto 

18  this  day :  behold,  it  is  behind  Kirjath-jearim.  And  they  passed  thence  unto  mount 
Ephraim,  and  came  unto  [as  far  as]  the  house  of  Micah. 


10 


11 


TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  1. —  H^nSS  properly  means:  tein  the  character  of  an  inheritance,  as  an  inheritance,"  cf.  Num.  xxvl.  63, 

•to.     The  nominative  to  r"T7DD"N7  is  to  be  supplied  from  the  thought  of  the  preceding  clause,  either  in  the  form  of 

n  vn3,  or,  better,  in  the  more  general  form  of  \*^S,  land.  The  writer  probably  intended  to  introduce  the  subject 
fcfter  the  verb,  but  as  he  proceeded  his  attention  was  diverted  by  subordinate  clauses,  and  so  he  ended  with  an  anaco- 
luthon.  —  Taj 

[2  Ver.  8.  —  VIp*  Dr.  Cassel  renders  "  sound,"  see  his  explanation  below.  Keil  and  others  understand  it  of  dialectic 
pronunciation  or  other  peculiarities  of  speech.  Bertheau  thinks  that  inasmuch  as  the  envoys  had  to  W  turn  aside  "  Iron 
their  way  in  order  to  get  to  Micah's  temple,  they  could  not  have  been  near  enough  to  hear  the  Levite's  voice  or  note  hi! 
pronunciation.  He  therefore  assumes  that  what  they  recognized  was  the  rc  tidings  :'  that  were  told  them  of  the  sanctu- 
ary near  by.  But  why  not  take  the  words  in  the  sense  in  which  any  man  would  naturally  take  them  at  the  first  read 
ing  ?  The  Levite  had  been  a  wanderer  ;  some  one  (or  more)  of  the  five  envoys  had  met  with  him,  and  now  recognizee  hij 
voice,  as  they  lie  encamped  near  by.  The  conversation  that  ensues  when  they  meet  with  him  is  certainly  exactly  such 
as  would  be  expected  under  such  circumstances  ;  and  the  account  which  Micah  gives  of  his  personal  aflairs  (ver.  4),  can 
scarcely  be  explained  on  any  other  supposition. —  Tr.] 

[3  Ver.  7.  —  n3tt?V  is  predicate  to  D3?n"flH,  and  as  such  ought  to  be  masculine.    The  feminine  is  accounted  foi 

'■'    V  T   T  V' 

tiu  the  principle  that  the  writer's  imagination  identifies  the  people  with  the  city  in  which  they  live,  and  so  speaks  of  them 
as  feminine,  cf.  Ewald,  Lehrb.  174  b ;  Green,  dram.  275,  2,  b.  The  appositional  masculine  participles  ntih1!  T2pt£7 
ouly  show  that  this  identification  is  no  longer  in  the  mind  of  the  writer.  —  Tr.J 


EXEGETICAL   AND   DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  1 .  In  those  days  there  was  no  king  in 
Israel.  This  is  repeated  in  order  to  intimate 
that  the  author  does  not  approve  of  what  he  is 
aliout  to  relate  concerning  the  Danites.  Such  a 
piratical  expedition  was  possible  only  when  there 
was  no  organic  national  authority  to  guard  the 
public  peace  and  watch  over  the  enforcement  of 
law.  The  kingly  office  is  a  guaranty  of  the  safety 
of  property  and  of  the  continuance  of  public  peace, 
and  does  not  permit  adventurous  expeditions,  un- 
dertaken for  the  injury  of  others.  These  very 
evils,  however,  were  prevalent  in  Germany,  not- 
withstanding imperial  rule ;  and  that  not  only  in 
the  Middle  Ages.  It  was  a  matter  of  great  diffi- 
culty, in  the  fourteenth  century,  to  bring  about  the 
formation  of  local  peace-compacts ;  and  even  then 
they  had  inserted  in  them  the  clause  of  the  West- 
phalian  treaty  of  1371,  according  to  which  a  city  or 
lord  was  only  forbidden  to  engage  in  hostilities  with- 
out a  previous  declaration  of  war.  Even  this  princi- 
ple would  have  condemned  the  Danites,  it  is  true, 
but  the  organic  government  in  the  interests  of  peace 

and  order  which  Israel  understood  by  iTOvQ, 
Kingdom,  royal  dominion,  had  no  existence  in  Ger- 
many, even  until  after  the  thirty  years'  war. 

For  that  unto  that  day  no  inheritance  had 
fallen  unto  them.     These  words  do  not  express 


the  view  of  the  narrator,  but  rehearse  the  complaint 
of  the  Danites,  which  was  causeless  however.  Dan 
had  certainly  received  an  inheritance ;  and  in  proot 
of  it  is  the  fact  that  even  at  this  time  the  tribe 
dwelt  in  the  district  of  Zorah  and  Eshtaol.  Its 
territory  extended  over  Timnah  and  Ekron,  as  far 
as  Joppa  on  the  coast  (Josh.  xix.  41-46)  ;  but  it 
had  been  crowded  into  the  mountains  by  the  Amor 
ites  (Judg.  i.  34),  and  had  failed  to  dispossess  the 
Philistines  of  the  plain  along  the  sea-coast.  On 
this  account  the  tribe  might  indeed  have  too  nar- 
row bounds  ;  but  instead  of  enlarging  their  bor- 
ders by  making  war  on  their  heathen  neighbors, 
they  complained.  If  they  had  not  been  lacking 
in  "the  true  enthusiasm  of  faith  in  Jehovah,  their 
onsets  of  irresistible  prowess  would  not  have  failed 
to  win  the  territory  allotted  to  them.  But  it 
was  easier,  it  must  be  allowed,  to  surprise  un- 
defended houses  and  lands,  than  to  contend  with 
the  five  princes  of  the  Philistines,  and  their  numer- 
ous armies.  The  words  before  us  are  only  the 
subterfuge  with  which  Dan  defended  the  unusual 
resolution  it  had  taken  before  the  other  tribes. 

Ver.  2.  And  the  sons  of  Dan  sent  of  their 
family  five  men.  Only  in  Israel  was  it  an  un- 
usual thing  to  look  about  for  other  possessions  than 
those  which  had  been  assigned.  Among  other  na- 
tions, the  reduction  of  a  too  numerous  population 
by  means  of  colonization,  was  a  matter  of  frequent 
occurrence  (cf.  Movers,  PhSnizier,  iii.  5,  etc.).     Id 


CHAPTER   XVIII.    1-13. 


231 


.he  case  of  Dan,  however,  the  resolution  to  look 
ibout  for  new  territory  was  not  arrived  at  by  a  few 
adventurers,  who  unceremoniously  cut  themselves 
loose  from  their  people,  but  by  the  whjle  commu- 
nity. The  commissioners  and  envoys  to  whom  the 
promotion    of    the   scheme   was    entrusted,   were 

elected  from  among  the  whole  (DrilSfpQ)  and  were 

not  ordinary  spies,  but  chosen  men  ( '*n  *tP3S), 
upon  whom  the  matter  naturally  devolved.  (Com- 
pare the  Roman  plan  of  appointing  commission- 
ers to  supervise  the  establishment  of  a  colony.) 
The  express  statement  that  they  were  told  "  Go, 
explore  the  land,"  is  added,  in  order  to  relieve 
them  from  every  appearance  of  having  acted  only 
on  their  own  responsibility. 

Vers.  3,  4.   There,  near  the  house  of  Micah, 

they  recognized  the  sound.  "  There  "  (DtP), 
I.  e.,  in  the  vicinity  of  the  "  temple-house,"  which  is 
here,  in  a  special  sense,  called  the  "  house  of  Micah." 

When  they  were  near  this  house  (j"T3"D5?),  they 

heard  the  "  sound  (Tip)  of  the  young  Levite." 
This  has  been  curiously  enough  understood  of  the 
voice  of  the  Levite.  But  how  could  the  Danites  tell 
by  the  voice  that  it  belonged  to  a  Levite  ?  The 
statement,  however,  becomes  instructive,  when  we 
call  to  mind  what  is  written  in  Ex.  xxviii.  35. 
The  Levite  in  Micah's  House  wore  the  priestly 
dress,  which  was  provided  with  bells,  in  order  "  that 

their  sound  maybe  heard  OTIp  UCCO)  when  he 
enters  into  and  comes  out  of  the  Holy  Place." 
The  Danites,  having  passed  the  night  pOv'Sj 
heard,  in  the  morning,  the  bells  of  the  officiating 
priest,  and  thus  learned,  to  their  astonishment,  that 
there  was  a  Levite  there. 

Vers.  5,  6.  Inquire,  we  pray  thee,  of  God 
(Elohim).  The  Danites,  it  is  evident  from  all  they 
do,  are  not  steadfast  in  their  faith  in  Jehovah. 
Hence,  also,  they  find  no  fault  with  the  Levite  for 
having  "  hired  "  himself  to  Micah  ;  nor  do  they 
hesitate,  when  they  learn  that  he  has  an  ephod  and 
teraphim  (ver.  14),  to  consult  his  oracle  about  the 
success  of  their  undertaking ;  but  that  Jehovah  was 
worshipped  here,  did  not  appear  to  them  to  be  the 
case.  The  narrator  indicates  this  very  delicately, 
by  making  them  say,  "Inquire  of  Elohim,"  al- 
though the  Levite,  in  the  account  he  gave  of  him- 
self, had  used  the  name  Jehovah,  for  to  his  service 
Micah's  House  was  nominally  devoted.  The  Le- 
vite's  response  is  oracular,  i.  e.,  thoroughly  ambig- 
uous :  "  Go  in  peace  :  E2|>7?  ninj'  [133  "  n?3 
is  simply  equivalent  to  coram ;  no  such  accessory 
idea  as  "  favorable,"  lies  in  the  words.  "  Your  way 
is  before  Jehovah  "  —  an  answer  unquestionably 
correct.  The  Danites  probably  explained  it  in  a 
favorable  sense,  on  account  of  the  "go  in  peace" 
which  preceded  it. 

Ver  7.  And  the  five  went,  and  came  to  Laish. 
Since  the  city  was  afterwards  called  Dan,  whose 
name  and  situation  at  one  of  the  sources  of  the 
Jordan  (and  that  not  the  spring  at  Banias),  was 
known  in  the  time  of  Josephus,  Robinson  was 
doubtless  right  in  saying  (B.  R.  iii.  392),  that  "of 
Ihe  identity  of  its  situation  and  that  of  Tell  el- 
Kiidy  there  can  be  no  question."  Ritter  (xv.  217) 
even  communicates  Wilson's  observation,  accord- 

1  [Our  author,  both  in  his  version  of  the  Hebrew  text 
ind  here,  transfers  Et^"1  from  the  end  of  one  verse  to  the 
aeginning  of  another,  but  without  good  reason.  —  Ta.] 


ing  to  which  the  name  Dan,  i.  e.,  judge,  survives  by 
translation  in  Kady,  the  surname  of  the  Tell 
Laish,  however,  lay  "in  the  valley  that  leads  to 
Beth-rehob  "  (ver.  28).  This  valley  can  scarcely 
be  any  other  than  the  present  Wady  et-Teim,  tha 
great  longitudinal  valley  which  extends  from  tha 
plain  of  Lake  Huleh  upward  to  Rasheiya.  Through 
this  valley  and  the  Ruka'a  runs  the  direct  road 
from  the  sources  of  the  Jordan  to  Hamath  (Rob. 
iii.  371).  The  spies  of  Moses  explored  the  land  aj 
far  as  Rehob,  where  the  road  leads  to  Hamath 
(Num.  xiii.  21).  Rehob  (prop.  Rechob)  is  a  name 
suggested  by  topographical  characteristics,  ant.  re- 
curs therefore  in  various  places.  It  always  presup- 
poses the  presence  of  a  plain  or  level  surface.2  It 
is  to  be  noted  that  Scripture  itself  does  not  speak 
of  either  Dan  or  Laish,  as  situated  at  the  sources 
of  the  Jordan.  We  may,  nevertheless,  venture  the 
conjecture  that  this  situation  may  be  found  indi- 
cated in  the  name  Laish  (tt1^ _).  Laish  signifies  a 
lion ;  and  ancient,  originally  Egyptian,  symbology, 
has  made  the  lion  the  sign  of  flowing  stream-sources. 
For  as  soon  as  the  sun  enters  his  sign  in  the  zo- 
diac, the  sources  of  the  Nile  begin  to  rise.  Hence, 
says  Horapollo,  the  mouths  of  fountains  are  pro- 
vided with  the  figures  of  lions.  This  also  accounts 
for  the  statement  of  Pollux,  that  the  lion  is  called 
Kpt]vo(pv\a^  "  guardian  of  springs,"  and  for  the 
wide-extended  usage  of  setting  up  figures  of  the 
lion  near  springs.  The  place  of  the  source  of  the 
Orontes  is  named  Lebweh,  which  also  means  lion. 
The  river  which  rises  near  Baalbek-Heliopolis  was 
called  Leontes  (at  present  Litany)  ;  and  the  lion 
himself,  as  Egyptian  symbol,  signified  "  House  of 
the  Sun."  On  the  front-side  of  a  building  over  tha 
spring  of  Ain  'Anflb  there  are  found  figures  of 
animals,  considered  to  be  either  lions  or  dogs  (Rit- 
ter, xvii.  676).  The  name  Laish  may  be  supposed 
to  indicate  in  a  similar  manner  the  fountain,  "one 
of  the  largest  in  the  world,"  which  leaps  down  in 
an  "  immense  stream  "  from  Tell  el-Kady  (Rob.  iii. 
390).  We  are  reminded  by  it  of  the  blessing  of 
Moses  (Deut.  xxxiii.  22)  :  "  And  of  Dan  he  said, 

Dan  is  a  i"THS  "113  (lion's  whelp) ;  he  leaps  forth 
from  Bashan."  The  attribute  thus  expressed  cor- 
responds, as  it  were,  to  that  indicated  in  the  name 
Laish.  Leshem,  the  name  under  which  the  place 
appears  in  Josh.  xix.  47,  gives  literal  expression, 
perhaps,  to  the  same  idea  which  was  figuratively 

indicated  by  Laish.  The  verb  37K77,  to  break 
through  (of  a  spring),  to  flow,  belongs  to  an  an- 
cient  and   widely   diffused   root.     Hence,    as   tha 

source  of  the   Jordan  was   called    EE?5,    so  the 

warm  springs  near  the  Dead  Sea  were  called  1'tT  7, 
Lesha,  changed  afterwards  into  Callirrhoe  (cf. 
lehhan,  Liens,  Lech,  Celtic,  Leis,  Lias,  and  numer 
ous  similar  river  names). 

Ver.  7.  There  was  no  hereditary  potentate 
in  the  land,  to  oppress  them  in  any  respect. 
The  observations  of  the  five  envoys  are  remark- 
able. They  find  the  city,  as  a  colony  of  Sidon, 
quietly  devoted  to  industrial  arts,  after  the  man 
ner  of  the  mother  city.  It  had  not  entered  into 
relations  for  mutual  protection  with  other  cities, 
probably  on  the  ground  of  its  being  a  colony. 
That  notwithstanding  this,  it  could  feel  itself  se- 
cure, and   live   without   much  warl'ke   vigilance, 

2  On  Rehob,  equivalent  to  Paltos,  con  pare  above,  01 
Judg.  i.  31. 


234 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


although  Sidon  was  so  far  away,  evinces  the  very 
peaceful  condition  of  the  Syria  of  that  day.     The 

envoys  observe  also,  that  "  there  is  no  "1???  H?T?^ 
in  the  land."  The  expression  is  obscure  by  reasou 
of  its  uncommonness.  It  seems  to  me,  that  it  can 
only  be  understood  in  this  way :  The  Danite  en- 
voys, during  their  stay  in  Laish,  investigate  par- 
ticularly the  ability  of  the  city  to  defend  itself.  In 
this  investigation  they  find  not  only  that  the  peo- 
ple are  engaged  in  peaceful  industry  (I2i?27),  while 
their  natural  allies  are  far  away,  but  also  that 
there  is  no  ~f?.V.  ttHV,  i.  e.,  no  dynast  or  tyrant, 
in  the  land,  with  armed  troops  in  his  pay,  ready 
for  war.  The  presence  of  such  a  one  would  make 
it  necessary  to  anticipate  serious  and  ready  resist- 
ance. Hence,  the  Persians,  when  they  took  pos- 
session of  Ionia,  deposed  the  tyrants  and  instituted 
popular  governments  everywhere  (Herod,  vi.  43). 

Under  the  ~1??  &~}V  of  our  passage,  we  are  to 
understand  what  the  Greeks  called  dynasts,  hered- 
itary despots,  who  exercised  supreme  control  in 
the  city.  There  is  no  thought  here  of  a  king  or  of 
sufletes,  but  of  a  tyrannical  oppressor,  who  with- 
out consent  of  the  inhabitants  has  become  their 
master,  and  who  surrounds  himself  with  armed 
troops,  in  order,  as  instances  in  both  Greek  and 
Phoenician  islands  and  cities  sufficiently  prove,  to 
preserve  the  succession  to  this  sort  of  government 
in  his  own  family  by  means  of  force.  In  this  ex- 
planation, ~l~3?  may  either  be  taken  as  the  object 

after  27 "JPi  in  the  sense  of  enforced  supremacy,  — 
in  which  case  1  Sam.  ix.  17  may  be  compared,  for 
"1237  is  indeed,  both  in  letter  and  sense,  the  Latin 
arcere,  and  sometimes  also  equivalent  to  coercere ; 
or  it  may  be  regarded  as  standing  in  subjective 

opposition  to  tt^1\  and  be  compared  with  ~I?N; 

=  "IDS,  lord,  commander  (cf.  the  Sanskrit  ft'ra), 
in  the  Aramaic  names  Nebuchadnezzar  and  Esar- 
haddon  (cf.  my  Ortsnamen,  i.  118).  Since  such  a 
Joresh-elser  wields  his  power  by  violence  and  with- 
out the  consent  of  his  subjects,  it  is  not  said  that 

none  such  "reigns"  in  the  land,  but  C,7?D"]',S, 
none  such  "injures,  oppresses."1  But  for  de- 
fense against  attacks  from  withont,  such  a  ruler  is 
undoubtedly  well  adapted,  as  may  be  Been  in  the 
instance  of  Polycrates.  The  envoys,  therefore,  are 
right,  when  they  consider  the  absence  of  such  a 
commander,  where  powerful  friends  are  far  away, 
and  military  activity  is  altogether  wanting,  as 
favorable  to  the  success  of  an  assailant. 

Vers.  8-10.  And  they  said,  Arise,  and  let  us 
go  up  against  them.  The  narrative  allows  an- 
cient manners  to  speak  for  themselves  in  a  very 
delicate  way.  The  five  envoys,  on  their  arrival  at 
home,  keep  quiet,  until  they  are  asked,  What  have 
ye?  Then,  however,  they  are  the  ones  who  stim- 
ulate the  irresolute  and  doubtful :  "  why  are  you 

silent?  be  not  slothful  /"Ittnb,  N"hb,  npV?;" 
for  to  go,  to  come,  and  to  have  what  you  desire,  is 
one  and  the  same  thing.    Ton  will  find  an  attrac- 

1  [Keil'a  explanation  of  this  passage  Is  in  all  essential 
points  very  similar,  except  that  he  defines  ~lt£ "J  WW, 
is  "one  vho  seizes  on  power,"  and  derives  (rightly,  no 


five  country  without  defense,  a  large  land,  to  which 
nothing  (either  of  wealth  or  attractiveness)  ii 
wanting.  This  representation  was  not  extrava- 
gant. Laish  was  situated  in  the  valley,  perhaps  on 
the  same  spot  afterwards  occupied  by  the  Daphne 
mentioned  by  Josephus ;  which  name,  in  the  Hel- 
lenistic period,  was  only  given  to  attractively  sit- 
uated places.  Accordingly,  Josephus  himself  also 
speaks  of  his  Daphne  as  a  delicious  place,  rich  in 
water-springs  (  Wars,  iv.  1,  1).  The  tract  of  land 
in  which  it  lay,  is  still  called  Ard  Difheh,  and  is 
covered  with  glorious  wheat-fields  and  noble  old 
trees  (Rob.  iii.  394).  The  emigrating  Messenians 
were  in  similar  manner  invited  by  Anaxilaus  of 
Rhegium  to  make  themselves  masters  of  Zankle 
in  Sicily,  being  told  that  it  was  a  blessed  land,  and 
in  a  fine  part  of  the  island  (Pans.  iv.  23).  Seneca 
remarks  (Consolatio  ad  Haviam  matron,  cap.  vi), 
that  many  emigrants  have  been  deceived  by  un- 
measured praises  of  the  fertile  territory. 

The  envoys,  in  order  to  strengthen  their  people 
add  that  "Elobim  has  given  the  land  into  theil 
hands,"  referring  probably  to  the  response  of  the 
Levite's  oracle. 

Ver.  1 1 .  And  there  broke  up  from  thence  six 
hundred  men,  girded  with  weapons  of  war. 
Six  hundred  families  either  volunteered,  or  were 
selected.  The  number  may  correspond  with  an- 
cient usage.  Livy  relates  that  the  Romans,  when 
engaged  in  a  colonizing  enterprise,  in  the  year  197 
before  Christ,  sent  out  three  hundred  families  into 
each  several  city  (xxxii.  29).  The  Danites,  like 
Greek  and  Roman  colonies,  set  out  as  if  for  war, 
with  banners,  arms,  and  means  of  subsistence  (ver. 
21).  In  a  speech  of  Demosthenes  it  is  said: 
'E,\ai±&o.vov  Tre/xTrSfi^voi  oVAa  4k  tov  Si^uoofov  teal 
4<p65ia  (cf.  Hermann,  Grieck.  Staatsalterthllmer,  § 
75,  2). 

Ver.  12.  'Wherefore  that  place  is  called 
"  Camp  of  Dan,"  unto  this  day :  behold,  it  is 
behind  Kirjath-jearim.  The  expedition  was  at 
that  time  an  extraordinary  event.  It  seemed  to 
renew  the  old  marches  of  Israel  in  the  desert,  for 
the  conquest  of  Canaan.  There  doubtless  existed 
notices  concerning  the  various  stations  which  they 
made  on  the  journey.  It  seems,  however,  that 
only  three  of  the  stations  are  known  to  us.  The 
first  was  the  "Machaneh  Dan,"  with  which  the 
first  awakening  of  Samson  to  his  life  of  heroism 
was  connected  (ch.  xiii.  25).  It  lay  between  Zorah 
and  Eshtaol,  and  was  therefore  doubtless  the  place 
of  rendezvous  for  the  expedition,  which  came  for 
the  most  part  from  those  cities  (ver.  11,  cf.  ver.  2). 
This  cannot  be  the  same  with  the  Machaneh  Dan 
near  Kirjath-jearim,  in  the  tribe  of  Judah,  of  which 
mention  is  here  made.  The  researches  of  Robin- 
son enable  us  to  locate  the  latter  near  the  modern 
Kuryet  el-'Enab,  whence  the  high  road  appears  to 
have  gone  over  the  mountains  of  Ephraim.  The 
third  is  the  sanctuary  of  Micah,  where  likewise 
the  "  camping-place  of  Dan  "  was  probably  long 
remembered.  At  all  events,  the  remark,  that  since 
this  expedition  the  name  Machaneh  Dan  existed, 
shows  that  the  event  took  place  before  the  days  of 
Samson  (during  which  Dan  appears  also  to  have 
been  in  an  enfeebled  condition),  and  is  therefore  to 
be  put  between  Gideon  and  Samson. 

doubt)  K7"1V  from  t^-^  in  the  sense  of  seizing,  and  not 
as  our  author  does,  in  the  sense  of  B  inheriting, "  or  rather, 
perhaps,  in  both  senses  at  the  same  time.  —  Ta.] 


CHAPTER  XVni.    14-31.  235 


The  Danites,  on  the  way  to  Laish,  pillage  the  sanctuary  of  Micah,  and  persuade  hi 

priest  to  go  with  them.     Micah  pursues,  but  finding  the  robbers  too  strong,  turns 

back.     The  conquest  and  destruction  of  Laish,  and  the  building  of  Dan. 

Chapter  XVIII.  14-31. 

14  Then  answered  the  five  men  that  went  to  spy  out  the  country  of  Laish,  and  said 
unto  their  brethren,  Do  ye  know  that  there  is  in  these  houses  an  ephod,  and  tera- 
phim,  and  a  graven  image,  and  a  molten  image  ?  now  therefore  consider  what  ye 

15  have  to  do.  And  they  turned  thitherward,  and  came  to  the  house  of  the  young 
man   the   Levite,  even  unto  [omit :  unto]   the   house  of  Micah,  and  saluted   him. 

16  And  the  six  hundred  men  appointed  [girded]  with  their  weapons  of  war,  which 

17  were  of  the  children  [sons]  of  Dan,1  stood  by  the  entering  of  the  gate.  And  the 
five  men  that  went  to  spy  out  the  land  went  up,  and  came  in  thither  [entered  the 
"house''],  and  took  the  graven  image,  and  the  ephod,  and  the  teraphim,  and  the 
molten  image :  and  the  priest  stood  in  the  entering  of  the  gate  with  the  six  hun- 

18  dred  men  that  were  appointed  [girded]  with  weapons  of  war.  And  these  went 
[when  these  had  gone]  into  Micah's  house,  and  fetched  the  carved  image,  the 
ephod,  and  the  teraphim,  and  the  molten  image.  [,]     Then  [then]  said  the  priest 

19  unto  them,  What  do  ye  ?  And  they  said  unto  him,  Hold  thy  peace,  lay  thine  hand 
upon  thy  mouth,  and  go  with  us,  and  be  to  us  a  father  and  a  priest :  Is  it  better 
for  thee  to  be  a  priest  unto  the  house  of  one  man,  or  that  thou  be  a  priest  unto  a 

20  tribe  and  a  family  in  Israel  ?  And  the  priest's  heart  was  glad,  and  he  took  the 
ephod,  and  the  teraphim,  and  the  graven   image,  and  went  in  the  midst  of  the 

21  people.     So  they  turned  and  departed,  and  put  the  little  ones,  and  the  cattle,  and 

22  the  carriage  [baggage]  before  them.  And  when  they  were  a  good  way  from  the 
house  of  Micah,-  the  men  that  were  in  the  houses  near  to  Micah's  house  were 

23  gathered  together,  and  overtook  the  children  [sons]  of  Dan.  And  they  cried 
[called  out]  unto  the  children  [sons]  of  Dan.  And  they  turned  their  faces,  and 
said  unto  Micah,  What  aileth  [What  is  the  matter  with]  thee,  that  thou  comest 

24  with  such  a  company  ?  And  he  said,  Ye  have  taken  away  my  gods  which  I  made, 
and  the  priest,  and  ye  are  gone  away :  and  what  have  I  more  ?  and  what  is  this 

25  that  ye  say  unto  me,  What  aileth  [is  the  matter  with]  thee  ?  And  the  children 
[sons]  of  Dan  said  unto  him,  Let  not  thy  voice  be  heard  among  us,  lest  angry 
fellows  [men  fierce  of  spirit]  run  [fall]  upon  thee,  and  thou  lose  [destroy]  thy 

26  life,  with  [and]  the  lives  of  thy  household  [house].  And  the  children  [sons]  of 
Dan  went  their  way :  and  when  [omit :  when]  Micah  saw  that  they  were  too 
strong  for  him  [stronger  than  he],  [and]  he  turned  and  went  back  unto  his  house. 

27  And  they  took  the  things  which  Micah  had  made,  and  the  priest  which  he  had,  and 
came  unto  [upon]  Laish,  unto  [upon]  a  people  that  were  at  [omit :  that  were  at] 
quiet  and  secure :  and  they  smote  them  with  the  edge  of  the  sword,  and  burnt  the 

28  city  with  fire.  And  there  was  no  deliverer,  because  it  [t. «.,  the  city,]  was  far  from 
Zidon,  and  they  had  no  business  with  any  man  [«. «.,  no  intercourse  with  other  people]  ;  and 
it  [the  city]  was  in  the  valley  that  lieth  by  [extends  to]  Beth-rehob.     And  they 

29  built  a  [the]  city,  and  dwelt  therein.  And  they  called  the  name  of  the  city  Dan, 
after  the  name  of  Dan  their  father,  who  was  born  unto  Israel :  howbeit  the  name 

30  of  the  city  was  Laish  at  the  first.     And  the  children  [sons]  of  Dan  set  up  the 
.  graven  image  [for  themselves] :  and  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Gershom,  the  son  of 

Manasseh  [Moses],  he  and  his  sons  were  priests  to  the  tribe  of  Dan  until  the  day 

31  of  the  captivity  of  the  land.8  And  they  set  them  up  Micah's  graven  image  which 
he  made,  all  the  time  that  the  house  of  God  was  in  Shiloh. 

TEXTUAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

[I  Ter.  16.  —  ]"T  "OStt  "^S.  The  unusual  position  of  this  clause,  separated  from  the  words  to  which  it  belongs, 
Jiay  be  explained  by  supposing  that  at  the  end  of  the  sentence  it  occurred  to  the  author  that  his  language  might  pos- 
sibly be  understood  of  six  hundred  men  stationing  themselves  to  guard  the  temple,  and  prohibit  the  approach  of  the 
Danites,  and  that  he  obviates  this  by  adding  the  present  clause.  The  E.  V.  places  the  words  where  according  to  the 
Muse  they  belong.  —  Th.] 


236 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


f2  Ver.  22.  —  713^   i"V3?2  ^r^PT^n   n^H  :   pf  they  had  just  withdrawn  from  the  house  of  Micah,  when  tin 

T  ...'.;.  T   ■■ 

men,'*  etc.     3o  Dr  Cassel,  but  not  so  well  as  the  E.  V.     The  verb  ^p^Pnn  properly  requires  a  complemental  rofit> 

ltive,    nD  <  7,    cf.  Ex.  viii.  24,  but  is  frequently  also,  as  here,  used  without  it.  — Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  30.  —  Dr.  Cassel  adopts  here  the  conjectural  reading  "ark  "  instead  of  "  land  ;  "  and  it  certainly  seems  thai 
if  criticism  is  ever  justified  in  resorting  to  conjecture,  it  is  so  in  this  passage.     See  the  discussion  below.  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  14.  Do  ye  know  that  there  is  in  these 
houses  an  ephod,  teraphim,  and  image  and 
cast-work  ?  The  five  men  who  had  reconnoitered 
Laish.  accompany  the  colony,  and  form  the  soul 
of  the  whole  undertaking.  This  is  manifestly  not 
conceived  and  carried  out  in  the  spirit  of  the  God 
of  Israel.  The  Danites  present  us  with  a  military 
expedition,  reckless  and  violent,  such  as  the  his- 
tory of  migrations  and  conquests  is  full  of.  Their 
road  leads  them  over  the  mountains,  and  past  the 
House  of  Micah.    What  houses  are  those  1  ask  the 

Danites.  And  their  guides  inform  them  (135il 
for  the  question  is  only  presupposed),  that  here 
there  is  a  private  sanctuary,  fully  provided  with 
everything  necessary  to  such  an  institution.  No 
Roman  colony  was  sent  forth  without  the  author- 
ity of  taking  auspices,  or  without  an  attendant 
pullarius.  The  Danite  envoys  had  asked  the 
priest  concerning  the  mind  of  Elohim,  and  had 
communicated  his  favorable  answer  to  their  breth- 
ren. The  need  of  an  oracle  of  their  own  becomes 
strongly  felt  by  these  warriors,  who  take  the  field 
from  wholly  subjective  motives.  The  people  have 
not  left  their  hereditary  landed  possessions  in  order 
to  lose  themselves  in  a  strauge  land,  but  to  pre- 
serve their  tribe-consciousness.  This  conscious- 
ness was  alive  in  them,  however,  only  so  far  as  its 
national  character  went.  They  remember  Dan, 
their  ancestor,  but  not  Jehovah,  their  God.  They 
were  not  unbelieving,  but  superstitious  ;  and  su- 
perstition is  subjective.  It  desires  to  be  helped  by 
Elohim,  but  it  has  no  penitence,  so  as  to  serve 
Jehovah.  The  Danites  desire  to  have  a  deity  of 
their  own,  to  direct  them  by  his  responses ;  and 
think  that  they  can  steal  him,  as  gold  and  prop- 
erty may  be  stolen.  Before  Jehovah  they  could 
not  stand  with  the  thoughts  of  robbery  and  death 
that  fill  their  hearts ;  but  in  these  houses,  they 
hear,  there  is  an  image  and  east-work,  ephod  and 
teraphim.  They  conclude  to  conquer  for  their 
future  city  its  appropriate  temple  service  also. 

Vers.  15-20.  And  they  came  to  the  house  of 
the  young  man  the  Levite,  the  house  of  Micah. 
The  manner  in  which  the  robbery  is  accomplished 
is  vividly  and  beautifully  portrayed.  The  five 
leaders  are,  of  course,  acquainted  with  the  Levite 
from  their  former  visit.  They  were  also  acquainted 
with  the  situation.  They  go  to  him,  and  greet 
him.  The  priest  recognizes  them,  and  permits 
them,  the  five,  to  enter  the  sanctuary.  He  him- 
self remains  at  the  gate,  where  the  six  hundred, 
in  their  warlike  array,  have  placed  themselves, 
while  the  families,  the  cattle,  and  the  rest  of  the 
train,  are  already  moving  off.  The  five,  being 
alone  in  the  temple,  take  all  its  treasures,  image 
and  image  adornments,  ephod  and  teraphim  (an- 
other proof  that  the  latter  were  small),  and  bring 
them  forth  (ver.  18),  when  the  priest  addresses 
them  :  "  What  do  ye  i "  Even  at  this  stage,  the 
narrative  does  not  conceal  the  lukewarmness  of  the 
priest.  He  was  not  watchful  when  the  people 
tame,  sent  no  information  of  anything  to  Micah 
ind  even  now  raised  no  alarm  to  prevent  the  theft 


which  he  could  not  but  know  was  in  progress.  He 
was  just  an  hireling.  Hence,  when  the  five  pro- 
pose to  him  to  be  priest  to  them,  a  whole  tribe 
rather  than  to  a  mere  individual,  but  in  that  case  to 
keep  still,  and  come  along  with  the  idols,  without 
making  a  noise, — he  accepts  the  offer  with  joy, 
takes  the  idols  into  his  priestly  hands,  and  is  for 
security  inclosed  in  the  midst  of  the  warriors. 
What  a  strange  thing  is  superstition  '  Thi«  priest 
has  first  of  all  betrayed  his  God  and  ms  office  for 
money,  has  by  his  name  as  priest  led  many  astray, 
and  now,  from  mere  vanity,  abandons  his  benefac- 
tor, who  has  treated  him  as  a  son  (ch.  xvii.  11), 
and  leaves  him  in  the  lurch ;  and  yet  he  is  eagerly 
snatched  up  as  something  valuable,  and  it  is  con- 
sidered a  great  point  gained  when  such  hands  as 
his  carry  gods  who  allow  themselves  to  be  taken 
off  by  robbers,  and  to  be  honored  and  praised  by 
traitors.  It  is  worthy  of  notice,  that,  according  to 
ver.  20,  the  priest  when  he  joins  the  warriors,  re- 
gains custody  only  of  the  "  ephod,  teraphim,  and 
image :  "  the  massekah,  the  ornament  of  the  image, 
containing  its  gold  value,  the  Danites  do  not  trust 
out  of  their  own  hands. 

Vers.  21-26.  They  had  just  departed  from 
the  house  of  Micah.  The  Danites  show  them- 
selves well  versed  in  the  arts  of  freebooters.  They 
assume  that  they  may  be  pursued.  Accordingly, 
they  cause  everything  that  cannot  defend  itself  oi 
is  difficult  of  transportation,  to  proceed  in  advance 

of  them.  (The  term  iTTQ?,  from  "Qf,  heavy, 
must  here  undoubtedly  be  taken  of  what,  like  cat- 
tle, admits  of  only  slow  transportation  ; 1  for  many 
valuables  the  Danites  can  scarcely  have  had  with 
them.  Moreover  —  and  this  is  important  here  — 
the  meaning  "  valuable,"  in  this  word,  is  only  a 
derivative  one  from  "  heavy.")  Thus  they  march 
along  —  behind  their  children,  sheep,  and  beasts  of 
burden  —  ready  for  instant  action.  Meanwhile, 
information  of  the  theft  had  reached  Micah.  About 
his  sanctuary  a  little  village  had  formed  itself. 
The  people  are  quickly  collected.  They  pursue. 
But  there  was  no  Abraham  here,  who  with  three 
hundred  and  eighteen  men  smote  great  armies. 
Neither  Abraham's  faith,  nor  Abraham's  good 
cause  were  here.  The  Danites,  when  they  hear 
the  outcries  of  the  pursuers,  act  at  first  as  if  noth- 
ing had  happened.  But  when  by  Micah's  anger 
they  perceive  that  he  knows  all,  they  —  probably 
the  five  leaders  —  tell  him  that  it  were  better  for 
him  to  be  quiet  —  he  might  otherwise  lose  more; 
for  the  people  there,  whom  he  sees,  are  fierce  of 
disposition,  and  know  no  mercy.  And  Micah  was 
obliged  to  yield  to  superior  power.  The  narrative 
shows  strikingly  how  men,  when  excited  about 
their  property,  show  their  true  faces.  Micah,  who 
has  always  talked  of  Jehovah,  as  he  who  did  him 
good,  now,  forgetting  himself  entirely,  calls  out 
to  the  Danites  :  "  Ye  have  taken  the  gods  which  I 
made."  i'or,  of  course,  only  "  gods  "  can  be  taken 
away,  not  Jehovah;  and  his  right  to  them,  is 
based  on  the  fact  that  he  made  them.  Strictly 
speaking,  he  cannot  complain.    He  had  taken,  and 

l  R.  Judah  Hallevi,  Eusari,  iv.  3,  explains  It  to  : 
"  retinue, n  such  a*  comporta  with  the  honor  of  a  king. 


CHAPTER   XVm.  14-31. 


237 


others  have  taken  from  him.  He  had  committed 
treason,  and  he  has  been  forsaken.  He  sees  now 
what  sort  of  fortune  the  priest  and  idolatry  brought 
him.  That  which  Micah  had  set  up  to  lead  others 
astrav,  became  the  occasion  in  consequence  of 
which  h  ■  was  robbed.  He  carried  sorrow  back 
with  him  into  his  house;  his  return  was  desolate, 
—  without  gold,  but  with  the  judgment  of  his  con- 
science. If  he  was  led  thereby  to  repentance,  we 
may  be  sure  that  he  soon  found  the  Eternal  God 
again,  who  pardons  sinners,  even  though  they  have 
fallen  seven  and  seventy  times. 

Vers.  27-29.  And  they  called  the  name  of  the 
city  Dan.  As  the  Messenians  changed  the  name 
of  the  city  Zankle  into  Messene,  so  the  Joktanides, 
who  migrated  from  Yemen  into  Central  Arabia, 
gave  their  tribe  name  to  the  possessions  they  con- 
quered, as  is  proved  by  the  kingdom  of  the  Ghas- 
sanides  on  the  borders  of  Syria  (cf  Ritter  xil. 
86).  It  has  been  the  general  and  constantly  re- 
curring usage  of  all  migrating  nations.  The 
strange  country  was  embellished  with  homelike 
names.  It  was  the  opinion  of  ancient  thinkers, 
that,  as  Seneca  wrote  to  his  mother,  the  best  con- 
solation in  exile  and  emigration  was  to  take  along 
what  one  had  been  accustomed  to  (natura  com- 
munis), as  also  one's  peculiar  gift  (propria  virtus). 
The  Danites  did  this.  They  held  their  ground  in 
the  new  Dan,  whose  fame  had  wholly  eclipsed  that 
of  the  old  home,  had  not  Samson  subsequently 
arisen  in  Zorah.  But  though  the  new  Dan  never 
overshadowed  the  old,  the  name  certainly  took 
firm  root  in  the  North,  and  in  the  expression  "  from 
Dan  to  Beer-sheba,"  indicated  the  northern  ex- 
tremity of  the  actual  possessions  of  the  twelve 
tribes,  although  the  Mosaic  boundaries,  and  some- 
times (as  under  David)  even  temporary  occupa- 
tion, extended  beyond  this  point. 

Nevertheless,  whenever  the  history  of  Israel  was 
rightly  apprehended,  in  its  properly  spiritual  char- 
acter, the  usurpation  of  Laish  was  never  approved 
or  justified.  It  was  an  arbitrary  breaking  in  upon 
the  given  order,  and  upon  the  claims  of  another 
tribe ;  for  the  new  Dan  settled  itself  in  districts 
which  formed  part  of  the  original  territories  of  the 
Northern  tribes,  particularly  of  Naphtali  (who,  it 
is  true,  had  also  failed  to  drive  out  the  inhabitants 
of  Beth-anath,  i.  e.,  Paneas,  cf.  ch.  i.  33).  The 
new  possession  was  associated  with  no  other  mem- 
ories than  such  as  conflicted  with  the  true  service 
of  God  :  it  was  dedicated  with  the  idolatrous  image 
of  Micah,  and  it  was  destroyed  with  the  Calf  of 
Jeroboam.1  The  usurpation,  it  should  be  care- 
fully observed,  proceeded  not  from  individuals,  but 
from  the  common  will  of  the  whole  tribe.  The 
division  of  Manasseh  was  contemplated  in  the  plan 
of  the  lawgiver  ;  but  the  self-division  of  Dan  was 
a  sin  against  the  organic  constitution  of  the  nation. 
Hence,  when  the  emigrants,  who  speak  of  them- 
selves as  a  "tribe"  and  "family"  in  Israel  (ver. 
19),  succeed  in  grafting  the  tribe  name,  Dan,2  on 
the  conquered  territory,  although  the  larger  part 
of  the  tribe  remained  behind,  the  result  is,  that, 
after  the  career  of  Samson,  the  name  became 
wholly  lost  from  its  old  home.  Even  in  Samson's 
day,  the  Danites,  as  such,  are  no  longer  spoken 
of.  The  tribe  Judah  already  attracts  everything 
to  itself.  The  very  remembrance  of  the  families 
if  Dan  perished,  for  which  reason  we  find  no  lists 
of  them  in  the  Books  of  Chronicles,  while  the 
"amilies  <if  Simeon,  whose  possessions  were  also 

t  Cf.  Amos  viii.  14,  and  Talmud,  Sabbat,  67  b. 


inclosed  by  those  of  Judah,  are  nevertheless  dull 
enumerated  (1  Chron.  iv.  24  fT.).  By  appropri- 
ating to  himself  that  which  did  not  belong  to  him 
Dan  lost  even  that  which  he  had.  It  is  on  such 
spiritual  grounds  as  these,  that  among  the  twelve 
tribes  of  the  Apocalypse  (ch.  vii.),  Dan  finds  no 
place.  For  of  this  tribe  alone  do  we  find  such  a 
notice  as  the  following : 

Vers  30,  31.  And  the  sons  of  Dan  set  up  the 
graven  image  for  themselves ;  and  Jonathan, 
the  son  of  Gershom,  the  son  of  Moses,  he  and 
his  sons,  were  priests  to  the  tribe.  Even  as  late 
as  the  last  century,  expositors  (as  Lilienthal,  Com- 
mentat.  Critica,  p.  192)  have  defended  the  reading 

Manasseh,  despite  its  suspended  3,  and  found  ap- 
proval in  so  doing  (cf.  Ernesti,  Theol.  Bibliothek, 
1771,  p.  112).  Whoever  is  able  to  form  a  concep- 
tion of  the  exegetical  scrupulousness  of  the  Jew- 
ish transcribers,  will  readily  perceive  that  if  HtCSi 

had  not  stood  in  the  MSS.,  that  reading  could 
never  have  been  introduced.  The  Talmudic  teach- 
ers admit  this  (Baba  bathra,  109  a),  and  ascribe 
the  circumstance  that  Moses  could  have  such  a 
descendant,  to  his  wife  (cf.  Jalkut,  n.  72).  Now, 
although  it  be  touching  to  observe  the  reverential 
piety  which  could  not  bear  to  have  the  name  of 
Moses  connected  with  that  of  an  idolatrous  priest, 
and  which,  therefore,  without  altering  the  Hebrew 
text  itself,  as  early  as  the  time  of  the  Talmudical 

teachers,  read  the  suspended  3  in  Hti?  D,  the  pro- 
ceeding stands  nevertheless  in  striking  contrast 
with  the  admirable  frankness  of  Biblical  writers, 
who  without  regard  to  men  state  facts  as  they  are, 
and  direct  the  confidence  of  the  faithful  people, 
away  from  mortals,  to  the  living  God  alone.  The 
priest  would  not  have  been  named  at  all,  but  for 
the  wish  to  point  out  the  contrast  between  his 
descent  from  the  lawgiver  who,  in  the  name  of 
God,  condemned  all  idolatry  as  mortal  sin,  and 
his  official  position  as  priest  at  the  shrine  of  an 
image.  To  this  contrast  alone,  Jonathan  owes  it 
that  his  name  was  not  forgotten.  Sad,  undoubt- 
edly, beyond  most  similar  cases,  is  this  instance 
of  degeneracy.  But  Scripture,  which  does  not  con- 
ceal the  human  weakness  of  even  Moses  himself, 
humbles  herewith  all  vanity  based  on  ancestors 
and  descent.  It  avails  nothing  to  be  a  descendant 
of  Moses,  if  there  be  no  personal  worth ;  and  the 
incomparable  greatness  and  legal  purity  of  the 
ancestor,  give  no  guaranty  that  his  descendants 
shall  not  become  apostates.  The  fate  of  Moses,  in 
this  respect,  was  equally  that  of  Abraham  and 
Jacob,  from  whom  Dan  was  descended.  Many 
have  called  themselves  children  of  Christ,  who 
acted  as  Micah  did.  It  is,  no  doubt,  remarkable, 
that  while  Micah's  priest  was  a  descendant  of 
Moses,  he  himself  was  an  Ephraimite,  conse- 
quently of  the  same  tribe  with  Joshua.  The 
priest  is  called  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Gershom,  the 
son  of  Moses,  not  as  if  he  were  the  immediate  son 
of  Gershom,  but  as  being  descended  from  Moses 
through  Gershom.  The  significance  of  the  state- 
ment lies  in  the  contrast  between  descendant  and 
ancestor.  It  is  this  also  that  is  made  prominent 
by  the  Talmudists,  when  in  connection  with  the 
change  of  Moses  into  Manasseh,  they  associate  th« 
latter  name  with  the  idolatrous  king  of  Judah. 
Since  Manasseh,  the  progenitor  of  the  tribe  of  the 

2  And  that  not  with  the  prefix  "New  "  with  which,  foi 
instance,  Carthago  Nova  took  the  name  of  the  mother  city. 


238 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


same  name,  was  not  a  Levite,  they  could  not  think 
of  him,  as  but  for  this  we  might  suppose.1 

Until  the  day  of  the  exile  of  the  ark  (land). 

The  words  VT?^  HrTJ  EV"1?  have  acquired 
extraordinary  importance  for  the  criticism  of  the 
Book  of  Judges.  Had  the  passage  been  found 
less  peculiarly  adapted  to  prove  the  late  composi- 
tion of  our  Book,  bringing  it  down  to  a  time  after 
the  exile  under  Shalmaneser,  the  attention  of  critics 
would  doubtless  have  been  arrested  by  the  singu- 
larity of  the  expression  V"?^!7  niv|  IV,  "  unto 
the  captivity  of  the  land."  For,  properly  speak- 
ing, there  was  no  such  thing  as  a  "captivity  of  the 
land."  A  captivity  of  Jerusalem  (Jer.  i.  3),  of 
Judah  (Jer.  xl.  1),  of  Samaria  (cf.  2  Kgs.  xvii.  28, 

Ti-IC&n),  of  Jehoiachin  (2  Kgs.  xxv.  27),  of  Cush 
(Isa.'  xx.  4),  is  indeed  spoken  of,  for  these  are  his- 
torical names,  representative  of  historical  nations 
that  were  carried  into  exile.  But  erets,  land,  is  not 
an  historical,  but  only  a  natural  name.  A  "  cap- 
tivity of  Canaan  "  would  be  intelligible,  but  not  a 
"  captivity  of  the  land."  Moreover,  there  were  no 
other  "captivities"  than  those  of  Israel  and  Judah. 
Now,  since  only  the  former  could  be  intended,  and 
since  a  dehuition  of  time  is  to  be  given,  we  should 
expect  to  tind  it  definitely  connected  either  with 

Samaria  or  Israel  (cf.  2  Kgs.  xvii.  23,  bNntp^  bj»1 ; 
cf.  2  Kgs.  xv.  29;  xviii.  11).  Nor  does  the  verb 
n  v2,  H  vJH,  to  take  into  exile  or  captivity,  or  its 

cognate  nouns,  ever  occur  in  connection  with  VT! " 
(land)  alone,  while  in  2  Kgs.  xxiv.  15  we  find  the 
entirely  intelligible  expression :  V^  ^fc?  vv- 
y^nj  "  he  carried  away  the  nobles  of  the  land." 
The  linguistic  improbability  of  the  assumption 

that  the  narrator  wrote  V""1^'  tne  'and>  is  rem" 
forced  by  even  stronger  historical  considerations. 
In  the  first  place,  there  would  arise  an  irremov- 
able contradiction  between  vers.  30  and  31,  if  ac- 
cording to  the  one  the  cultus  of  the  image  at 
Dan  continued  until  the  exile  of  Israel,  while  ac- 
cording to  the  other  it  endured  only  to  —  say  the 
death  of  Eli.  For  Bertheau's  endeavor  to  show 
that  no  such  contradiction  arises,  cannot  stand 
examination.  The  descendants  of  Jonathan  are 
spoken  of,  not  as  having  been  priests  in  general, 

but  most  definitely  as  having  served  the  '??! 
image,  of  the  tribe  of  Dan.  For  this  reason,  the 
setting  up  of  the  image  (!U2>f?»TJ)  and  the  ap- 
pointment to  its  priesthood,   are  first  spoken  of, 

1  [Keil  has  the  following  note  on  this  subject :  "  The 
Talmud  remarks,  Baba  bathra,  f.  109b:  An  Gersom 
JUius  M'nnssis  Juit,  et  non  potius  Mosis?  sicitt  scriptum 
est  •  Filii  Mosis  fuerunt  Gersom  et  Etieser  (1  Chron.  xxiii. 
14),  std  propterea  quod  fecit  opera  Menassis  (the  idolatrous 
son  of  Uezekiah.  2  Kgs.  xxi.),  appendil  eum  scriptum  familuE 
Manassis.  On  this  Rabba  bar  Cfianna  observes: 
vropftelam  (t.  e.,  the  author  of  the  Book  of  Judges)  studio 
nolitissc  Gersonunt  appellare  / ilium  Mosis  quia  igno- 
miniosum  JuissH  id  Mosi,  habuisse  JUium  impium,  sed  vocat 

turn  /ilium   Menassis,  lilera  lamen  3  sursum  elevata, 

in  signum  earn  adetse  vel  abesse  posse,  et  sit  JUius  nt£*2T2 

MtrUUtisvel  HtT^D  Mosis;  Menassis,  studio  et  imilatione 
mpictntis,  Mosis,  prosapia.  Cf.  Buxtorff,  Tiber,  p.  171 
Ijiter  Rabbins  say  the  same  thing.     R.  Tanchum  calls  the 

CTiting  nti?3H   with  3  suspended,  a  C"]DiD  PpW 


in  ver.  30,  while  its  permanent  preservation  and 
maintenance  (•"lO^ttT.'l  are  set  forth  in  ver.  31. 
This  was  already  seen  by  Jewish  expositors,  who 
were  not  influenced  by  what  Bertheau  calls  "pet 
ideas  "  of  modern  times.  R.  Jesaia  says :  The 
exile  of  Sanherib,  cannot  be  meant ;  for  the  time 
during  which  the  House  of  God  was  at  Shiloh 
is  spoken  of.  It  must  also  be  considered  quite  im- 
probable that  this  separatistic  idolatrous  worship 
in  Dan  should  have  been  allowed  to  exist  unmo- 
lested during  the  time  of  Samuel,  David,  and 
Solomon.  The  story  of  Micah's  image  is  intro- 
duced with  the  words,  "  in  those  days  there  was  no 
king  in  Israel,"  in  order  to  explain  the  possibility 
of  such  an  occurrence  Could  the  author  have 
written  thus,  if  the  history  of  the  kings,  from 
Jeroboam  to  Manasseh,  had  already  been  before 
him  '.  And  was  not  David  just  such  a  king  as  there 
was  not  in  the  time  of  Mieah  ?  Head  the  history 
of  the  first  years  of  Solomon,  the  eighth  chap- 
ter of  the  first  Book  of  Kings  among  others,  and 
consider  whether  it  seem  possible  to  receive  the 
existence  at  that  time  of  a  separate  idolatrous 
worship  in  Dan,  with  a  priestly  family  of  its  own. 
And,  certainly,  if  such  a  worship  had  still  ex- 
isted when  Jeroboam  cut  himself  loose  from  the 
house  of  David,  he  would  not  have  found  it  neces- 
sary to  institute  in  that  very  place  the  new  cultus 
of  the  calf.  Not  upon  him,  would  the  burden  of 
this  sin  have  rested  in  that  case  (cf.  1  Kgs.  xiv.  16). 
Nor,  if  in  his  time  there  had  been  a  family  of  Le- 
vitical  priests  in  Dan,  would  he  have  needed  to 
look  for  others,  "  who  were  not  of  the  sons  of 
Levi"  (1  Kgs.  xii.  31). 

If  what  has  here  been  briefly 2  stated  be  duly 
considered,  it  will  be  felt  to  be  necessary  to  substi- 
tute Ti"1^,  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  for  V^'t't  » 
the  land.  This  departure  from  the  letter  of  Scrip- 
ture is  demanded  by  true  reverence  for  its  spirit. 
It  is  no  wonder,  therefore,  that  even  the  positive 

expositors  among  the  Jews  maintained  that  V^?<7 
must  be  explained  as  P^SH,  although  naturally 
they  do  not  speak  of  another  reading.  Thus  Kim- 
chi :  ]  i~ISn  nb227  OV  Win.  Abarbanel  takes 
it  in  a  similar  manner.3  It  was  probably  under 
the  influence  of  similar  considerations  that  Hou- 

bigant  conjecturally  read  Tl")Wn,  to  which  Bleek 
(Einleitung,  p.  347)  and  Ewald  (AlterthUmer,  p. 
258,  2d  ed.)  are  likewise  strongly  inclined.  The 
conjecture  is  so  clear  and  easy,  that  the  refusal  to 
entertain  it  may  well  be  met  with  the  saying,  "  the 
letter   killeth."      The   statement   intended   to   be 

and  speaks  of  HCffJi  }2  as  Eethibh,  and  of  ntUjD  ]2, 
on  the  other  hand,  as  Eeri.  According  to  this,  ben  Mosfu/i 
is  certainly  the  original  reading,  albeit  the  reading  ben  Me* 
nasfisheh  is  also  very  old,  seeing  that  it  was  read  by  the 
Targum,  the  Peshito,  and  the  Septuagint,  although  in  a 
few  codices  of  the  latter  the  reading  viou  Muva-iJ  is  stiU 
found,  cf.  Kennic.  Dissert.  Gener.  in  V.  T.  §  21.  Jerome 
also  hajs  JUH  Moysi."  —  Te.] 

2  For  much  of  it  was  long  since  strongly  brought  for- 
ward (cf.  Keil  in  loco).  [Keil,  it  may  be  proper  to  remark, 
does  not  propose  to  change  the  reading,  but  quotes  approv- 
ingly Hengstenberg's  explanation  of  it,  as  indicated  in  the 
following  words  :  "  The  historian  considers  the  whole  land 
as  carried  away  into  captivity  in  its  sanctuary,  which,  as  il 
were,  formed  its  kernel  and  essence  "  {Pent.  i.  191,  Ky  land's 
edit.).  —  Tb.] 

s  p-isn  nba  "Qtr  ptn  bs  ncs  bnN, 

ed.  laps.  p.  67. 


CHAPTER   XVm.  14-31. 


235 


made  is,  that  the  priests  in  Dan  served  at  the 
shrine  of  the  idol  until  the  exile  of  the  ark.  It  is 
precisely  the  Book  of  Samuel,  in  which  the  cap- 
ture of  the   ark   is   related,  that   uses   the   word 

i"02  more  frequently  than  any  other  historical 
book.  The  wife  of  the  slain  priest  cries  out,  while 
6he  gives  birth  to  a  child,  and  dies  :  TISJ  *tt 
vS^E^,  "  gone  is  glory  from  Israel  "!  (1  Sam.  iv. 
Si ) ;  and  hence,  the  son  whom  she  bore  was  called 
"  Ichabod :  where  is  the  glory."  The  very  same 
word  is  here  used.  Now,  the  removal  of  the  ark. 
and  the  death  of  the  sons  of  Eli,  were  matters  of 
extraordinary  importance,  not  for  the  people  only, 
but  more  especially  for  the  priests.  Their  pride 
and  sinfulness  had"  been  previously  delineated  by 
the  narrative.      They  had   thought,   without   re- 

Eentance,  to  conquer  with  the  sacred  ark.  The 
umiliation  touched  them  with  peculiar  force.  Eli 
dies  from  dismay ;  his  sons  are  slain  by  the  enemy  ; 
the  ark  of  the  covenant,  the  precious  jewel  of  the 
priestly  charge,  falls  into  the  hands  of  the  heathen. 
The  moral  degeneracy  of  the  priestly  family  is 
already  indicated  in  the  election  of  Samuel.  He, 
too,  was  an  Ephraimite,  but  one  of  a  different 
stamp  from  Micah.  Now,  however,  the  whole 
fabric  of  priestly  pride  falls  into  ruins,  and  under 
the  leadership  of  Samuel,  the  era  of  repentance 
begins.  It  is  only  when  all  this  is  taken  into  con- 
sideration, that  the  parallelism  of  vers.  30  and  31 
stands  ont  in  unexpected  light.  Jonathan  and  his 
descendants,  sons  of  Levi  and  of  Moses,  continued 
to  officiate  as  priests  in  Dan,  until  the  ark  went 
into  exile.  After  this  great  national  calamity,  a 
reformation  ensued,  including  both  the  head  and 
the  members.  The  priests  were  terrified,  and  re- 
pented ;  their  vainglorious  assumption  that  wher- 
ever they  were  there  the  worship  of  God  was  also, 
was  thoroughly  overthrown,  and  they  retired  from 
the  theatre  of  their  evil  doing.  For  this  reason  it 
is  said  of  Jonathan  and  his  successors,  that  "  they 

were  priests  l*!- 1SPT  D  w2"737,  until  the  exile  of 
the  ark."  And  as  in  ver.  30  the  duration  of  their 
priestly  activity  corresponds  with  the  time  that  in- 
tervened until  the  fall  of  the  ark,  so  in  ver.  31,  the 

1  The  great  significance  of  the  exile  of  the  ark  of  the 
covenant,  was  still  fully  felt  when  Pa.  lxxviii.  was  written, 
compare  vers.  60  and  61 :  "  He  rejected  the  tabernacle  of 
Ihlloh,'"  and  "  He  delivered  his  strength  (glory)  into  captiv- 
Ifcr."     The  whole  bearing  of  the  psalm  forbids  the  suppoei- 


idolatrous  House  of  Micah  stands  in  contrast  with 
the  House  of  the  true  God  in  Shiloh.  The  same, 
point  of  time  is  indicated  in  both  verses.  For  with 
the  removal  of  the  ark,  the  significance  of  Shiloh 
ceased.  Where  the  ark  was,  there  God  could  1j6 
inquired  of.2  With  the  fall  of  the  ark,  the  priests 
in  Dan  ceased  ;  when  the  true  sanctuary  in  Shiloh 
was  broken  up,  the  spurious  sanctuary  of  Micah 
also  was  no  longer  esteemed.  The  lesson  con- 
veyed is,  that  if  the  true  spirit  of  devotion  to  Jeho- 
vah had  been  preserved  in  connection  with  Shiloh 
and  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  such  things  as  were 
done  by  Micah  and  in  Dan  would  have  been  mor- 
ally impossible.  The  priesthood  must  suffer  and 
repent,  before  idolatry  could  be  removed.  It  is 
true,  that  while  the  House  of  Micah  was  formerly 
spoken  of  as  a  Beth  Elohim,  a  term  applicable  to 
every  heathen  temple  as  well,  the  House  at  Shiloh 
is  here  called  Beth  ha-Elohim,  House  of  the  true 
and  real  God  ;  but  it  is  nevertheless  very  signifi- 
cant that  it  is  not  called  Beth  Jehovah.  During 
Shiloh's  existence,  the  glory  of  the  Levites  had 
become  greatly  tarnished.  The  descendants  of 
Aaron  —  as  witness  the  sons  of  Eli  —  had  dese- 
crated their  office;  the  descendants  of  Moses  served 
the  idol  in  Dan.  But  when  with  the  fall  of  the 
ark  the  time  of  repentance  had  come  for  the  priests 
of  Aaron's  tribe,  the  sin  of  the  children  of  Moses 
also  came  to  an  end.  Repentance  leads  the  chil- 
dren back  to  their  fathers. 

In  this  way,  the  necessity  of  finding  in  our  text 
a  reference  to  the  removal  of  the  ark  demonstrates 
itself  both  externally  and  internally.  The  fact 
that  this  exposition  is  not  found  indicated  in  the 
Masora,  is  to  be  explained  from  the  fidelity  with 
which  every  letter  was  preserved,  but  especially 
from  the  circumstance  that  during  the  exile  of 
the  people,  the  minds  of  the  writers  and  readers  of 
the  ancient  manuscripts  were  naturally  full  of  that 
sad  event,  while  the  historical  fact  of  the  exile  of 
the  ark  of  the  covenant  belonged  to  the  hoary  past. 
In  exile,  Israel  read  and  found  this  fate  on  every 
page.  To  their  thoughts,  "  the  land,"  which  they 
had  left,  was  ever  present.  The  banished  reads 
"  home,"  in  every  thing. 

tion  of  a  sanctuary  in  Shiloh  until  the  Assyrian  period 
(Delitzsch,  on  Ps.  Ixxviii.  60  ff. |. 

2  This  is  also  clearly  proved  by  eh.  xx.  27 :  (t  And  the 
sons  of  Israel  inquired  of  Jehovah ;  ftr  the  ark  of  ihi  «*» 
nant  of  God  mat  that  in  thou  days  " 


240  THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


SECOND  SECTION. 

THE  STORY  OF  THE  INFAMOUS  DEED  PERPETRATED  AT  GIBEAH,  AND   ITS  TERRIBLE  CONSEQUENCES 

ANOTHER   ILLUSTRATION    OF    THE    EVILS    THAT    RESULT   WHEN    "EVERT  MAN    DOES 

WHAT    IS   GOOD    IN    HIS    OWN   EYES." 


A  Levite,  whose  concubine  has  left  him,  goes  to  her  father's  house,  and  persuades  htf 
to  return.    On  their  journey  home,  they  enter  Gibeah  to  pass  the  night  there^ 
but  are  inhospitably  left  in  the  market-place,  until  an  Ephraimite  resi- 
dent of  the  city  takes  them  home. 

Chapter  XTX  1-21. 

1  And  it  came  to  pass  in  those  days,  when  there  was  no  king  in  Israel,  that  there 
was  a  certain  Levite  sojourning  on  the  side  [in  the  hinder  parts]  of  mount  Ephraim, 

2  who  took  to  him  a  concubine  out  of  Beth-lehem-judah.  And  his  concubine  played 
the  whore  against  him,1  and  went  away  from  him  unto  her  father's  house  to  Beth- 
lehem-judah,  and  was    there    [some   time  (namely),]  four  whole  [omit :  whole] 

3  months.  And  her  husband  arose,  and  went  after  her,  to  speak  friendly  unto  her, 
and  to  bring  her  again,'2  having  his  servant  with  him,  and  a  couple  of  asses  :  and 
she  brought  him  into  her  father's  house :  and  when  the  father  of  the  damsel  saw 

4  him,  he  rejoiced  to  meet  him.  And  his  father-in-law,  the  damsel's  father,  retained 
him  ;  and  he  abode  with  him  three  days  :  so  they  did  eat  and  drink,  and  lodged 

5  there.  And  it  came  to  pass  on  the  fourth  day,  when  [that]  they  arose  early  in  the 
morning,  that  [and]  he  rose  up  to  depart :  and  the  damsel's  father  said  unto  his  son- 
in-law,  Comfort  [Strengthen]  thine  heart  with  a  morsel  of  bread,  and  afterward  go 

6  your  way.  And  they  sat  down,  and  did  eat  and  drink  both  of  them  together :  for 
[and]  the  damsel's  father  had  [omit:  had]   said  unto  the  man,  Be  content,  I  pray 

7  thee,  and  tarry  all  [pass  the]  night,  and  let  thine  heart  be  merry.  And  when  the 
man  rose  up  to  depart,  his  father-in-law  urged   him :  therefore  he  [turned  and] 

8  lodged  there  again.  And  he  arose  early  in  the  morning  on  the  fifth  day  to  depart : 
and  the  damsel's  father  said,  Comfort  [Strengthen]  thine  heart,  I  pray  thee.  And 
they  tarried  3  until  afternoon   [until  the  day  declined],  and  they  did  eat  both  of 

9  them.  And  when  the  man  rose  up  to  depart,  he,  and  his  concubine,  and  his  ser- 
vant, his  father-in-law,  the  damsel's  father,  said  unto  him,  Behold  now,  the  day 
draweth  toward  evening,  I  pray  you  tarry  all  [pass  the]  night :  [and  again :]  behold, 
the  day  groweth  to  an  end  [declines],  lodge  here,  that  [and  let]  thine  heart  mav 
[omit :  may]  be  merry ;  and  to-morrow  [you  shall]  get  you  early  on  your  way, 

10  that  thou  mayest  go  home  [and  thou  shalt  go  to  thy  tent].  But  the  man  would  not 
tarry  that  night,  but  he  rose  up  and  departed,  and  came  over  against  Jebus,  which 
is  Jerusalem  :  and  there  were  with  him  two  asses  saddled,  his  concubine  also  was 

1 1  with  him.  And  when  they  were  by  Jebus,  the  day  was  far  spent ;  and  the  servant 
said  unto  his  master,  Come,  I  pray  thee,  and  let  us  turn  in  into  this  city  of  the 

12  Jebusites,  and  lodge  in  it.  And  his  master  said  unto  him,  "We  will  not  turn  aside 
hither 4  into  the  city  of  a  stranger,  that  is  not   of  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel ; 

13  we  will  pass  over  to  [as  far  as]  Gibeah.  And  he  said  unto  his  servant,  Come,6 
[forward:]  and  let  us  draw  near  to  one  of  these  [the  sc.  neighboring]  places  [,]  to  lodge 

14  all  [and  pass  the]  night,  [omit:  ,]  in  Gibeah,  or  in  Raniah.  And  they  passed  on 
and  went  their  way  ;  and  the  sun  went  down  upon  them  when  they  were  by  Gibeah, 

15  which  belongeth  to  Benjamin.  And  they  turned  aside  thither,  to  go  in  and  to  lodge 
in  Gibeah:  and  when  he  went  in,  he  sat  him  down  in  a  street  [the  open  space]  of 

1 6  the  city  :  for  [and]  there  was  no  man  that  took  them  into  his  house  to  lodging.  And 
behold,  there  came  an  old  man  from  his  work  out  of  the  field  at  even,  which  was 
also  [and  the  man  was]  of  mount  Ephraim  ;  and  he  sojourned  in  Gibeah  ;  but  the 


CHAPTER  XIX  1-21.  241 


17  men  of  the  place  were  Benjamites.     And  when  [omit :  when]  he  had  [omit:  had 
lifted  up  his  eyes,  he  [and]  saw  a  [the]  wayfaring  man  in  the  street  [open  space_ 
of  the  city  :  and  the  old  man  said,  Whither  goest  thou  ?  and  whence  comest  thou  ? 

18  And  he  said  unto  him,  We  are  passing  from  Beth-lehem-judah  toward  the  [hinder] 
side  of  mount  Ephraim  ;  from  thence  am  I :  and  I  went  to  Beth-lehem-judah,  but 
I  am  now  going  to  the  house  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  ; 6  and  there  is  no  man  that 

19  receiveth  me  to  house.  Yet  there  is  [we  have]  both  straw  and  provender  for  our 
asses  ;  and  there  is  [we  have]  bread  and  wine  also  for  me.  and  for  thy  handmaid, 
and  for  the  young  man  which  is  with  thy  servants  :  there  is  no  want  of  any  thing. 

20  And  the  old  man  said,  Peace  be  with  thee ;  howsoever  [only],  let  all  thy  wants  lie 

21  upon  me  ;  only  lodge  not  in  the  street  [open  space].  So  he  brought  him  into  his 
house,  and  gave  provender  unto  the  asses :  and  they  washed  their  feet,  and  did  eat 
and  drink. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

L*  Ver.  2.  —  V73?  ("T3Tm.  Dr.  Cassel  renders  :  Und  «  geliisttte  seinem  Nebenweib  iiber  ihn  hinaus ;  which  may 
possibly  be  good  interpretation,  but  cannot  be  admitted  as  translation.  The  Sept.  and  Vulg.  do  not  render  the  phrase  at 
all,  while  the  Chaldee  softens  it  down  to  "she  despised  him."  Henoe,it  has  been  thought  that  the  present  reading  of  the 
Hebrew  test  13  wrong ;  but  the  fact  that  the  Peshito  has  it,  and  that  tbe  other  ancient  versions  do  not  agree  in  their  read- 
ing, shows  that  the  diversity  arose  from  a  sense  of  incongruity  between  what  was  affirmed  of  the  woman  and  the  efforts 

of  the  Levite  to  recover  her.      V72?  Is  "against  him."  —  Tb.] 

2  Ver.  3.  —  The  keri  n^tTPf/  Is  evidently  the  more  appropriate  reading,  as  Studer  and  Bertheau  have  con- 
ceded. [In  the  kethibh,  i^tTn^,  the  suffix  refers  to  the  preceding  27  '  "to  cause  her  heart  to  return,"  i,  e.t  to 
turn  again  to  her  husband.     Compare  Keil,  who  deems  the  keri  a  "  needless  correction."  —  Tr.J 

8  Ver.  8-  —  ^niprTCnn.  Older  Jewish  expositors,  as  Abarbanel  and  Meir  Obernick,  very  properly  take  this, 
not  as  imperative,  but  as  3d  "per.  perf.  It  is  against  the  sense  to  make  the  father  say  :  "  Delay  till  it  become  evening." 
Ver.  9  also  is  against  this.     On  the  word,  see  ch.  ill.  26.     Beza  has  correctly  :  cunctati  sunt. 

[4  Ver.  12. —  The  «  hither  "  of  the  E.  V.  seems  to  be  intended  as  a  rendering  of  HSH,  which,  however,  belongs  to  the 

next  clause.     H^n  must  be  taken  with  "llTSt,  in  the  sense  D127    •   •    •   •   *")tTK,    "where."      "It  is  true"  (saya 

Bertheau),  "  that  PTSn  does  not  elsewhere  occur  in  this  construction  with  "ltt'M*  *>u*:  tm*s  *s  'ne  0D'V  suitable  way  ot 
taking  it  here,  for  it  cannot  be  the  plur.  fern,  pronoun,  and  must  therefore  mean  f  there.'  "  The  proper  rendering  of  the 
Terse,  then,  would  be  :  "  We  will  not  turn  aside  into  the  city  of  the  stranger,  where  there  are  none  of  the  Bons  of  Israel." 
The  E.  V.  leaves  it  doubtful  whether  "  that  "  refers  to  "  city  "  or  to  "  stranger."     Dr.  Cassel  refers  it  to  the  latter,  and 

Ignores  the  H3n  altogether.  —  Tr.] 

[6  Ver.  13.  —  TJ  7  is  for  H^?,  the  imperative  of  "J/n,  with  He  paragogio. *13  T*  is  the  1st  per.  plur.  perfect,  con 

tracted  from  -1D2  7.  —  Tr.] 

[6  Ver.  18.  —  Tfbn    N3fc$   iTin*  rTSTlMX     The  meaning  of  this  clause  is  obscure.     The  Sept.  renders  as  if  it 

read  \"V2  instead  of  mrV   j"V2  :   I  am  going  to  my  house.     The  Targum,  Peshito,  Vulgate,  and  among  moderns, 

Bertheau,  De  Wette,  Bunsen  (the  two  latter  in  their  versions),  take  JTirV  ns2"i"lS  as  the  accusative,  and  render  aa 

the  E.  V.  Others,  as  Studer,  Keil,  and  our  author,  take  j*"lM  as  a  preposition,  in  the  sense  "  with,'*  "  at,"  or  "  by  :  "  "I 
walk  by  (or,  in)  the  House  of  Jehovah,1'  i.  c,  I  perform  priestly  service  in  connection  with  the  sanctuary.  This  gives  a 
good  sense  (cf.  the  commentary  below),  but  the  mode  of  expressing  it  seems  singular.  On  the  other  hand,  there  is  no 
compulsory  evidence  in  favor  of  this  and  against  the  other  rendering.  The  sanctuary  being  at  Shiloh,  there  is  (so  far  as 
the  site  of  this  place  is  known)  no  conflict  between  the  Levite's  first  statement  that  he  is  going  to  the  "  hinder  parts  "  (a 
necessarily  indefinite  expression)  of  the  mountains  of  Ephraim,  and  his  subsequent  supplementary  statement  that  he  la 

going  to  the  "House  of  Jehovah."  Keil's  objection  that  fTH  T|.?n  does  not  mean  to  go  to  a  place,  but  to  pass 
through  it  (cf  Deut.  i.  19  ;  Isa.  1.  10.  etc.),  cannot  be  considered  decisive.  Since  the  "  through  "  does  not  lie  in  the 
r*lH,  it  proves  only  that  the  accusative  may  indicate  either  the  place  to  which,  or  that  through  which,  one  goes.  It  li 
true,  that  tbe  place  to  which  one  goes,  is  usually  put  in  the  accusative  without  .HM,  either  with  or  without  71  local  : 

but  as  nS  was  constantly  used  with  the  definite  accusative,  and  had  withal  bo  entirely  lost  all  meaning  of  its  own,  it 
Is  certainly  quite  conceivable  that  it  might  almost  unconsciously  slip  from  the  pen  in  a  place  where  ordinarily  common 
Usage  did  not  employ  it.  And  since,  as  already  remarked,  the  idea  of  "  through  "  does  not  lie  in  flS,  it  may  well  be 
asked  whether  the  instances  referred  to  by  Keil  are  not  exceptions  to  common  usage  quite  as  much  as  the  present  phrase. 
Upon  the  whole,  we  are  inclined  to  adopt  the  rendering  of  the  E.  V.  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTBENAL. 
Ver.  1.  "When  there  was  no  king  in  Israel. 


ready  remarked,  no  special  connection,  either 
chronological  or  local,  with  the  history  related  id 
chaps,  xvii.  and  xviii. ;  but  it  none  the  less  affords, 


rhc  following  narrative  has,  indeed,  as  was  al- ,  in  conjunction  with  that  history,  occasion  for  a 
16 


242 


THE   BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


series  of  observations  which  testify,  in  a  highly  in- 
structive manner,  of  the  organic  idea  which  per- 
vades the  whole  Book.  We  shall  attempt  to  indi- 
cate them  at  the  close  of  the  narrative.  "  There 
was  no  king  in  Israel : "  this  alone  it  was  that 
made  the  occurrences  of  both  chaps,  xvii.  and 
xviii.,  and  chaps,  xix.-xxi.  possible.  In  the  pres- 
ent history  also,  a  Levite  is  involved.  The  decay 
of  the  priesthood  is  here  also  indicated.  From 
the  connection  it  is  sufficiently  clear  that  the  con- 
duct of  the  Levite  who,  living  in  the  northern 
part  of  the  mountains  of  Ephraim,  procures  him- 
self a  concubine  out  of  Bethlehem  —  probably  for 
no  other  reason  than  that,  as  Josephus  rightly 
conjectures,  he  was  smitten  with  her  beauty,  —  is 
not  approved.  From  the  fact  that  the  residence  of 
the  Levite  is  here  spoken  of  as  being  in  the  "  hinder 
parts  "  of  the  mountains,  by  which  the  northern 
parts  are  to  be  understood,  no  reliable  inference 
can  be  drawn  as  to  the  locality  of  the  writer ;  for 
the  Levite  himself  uses  the  same  expression  (ver. 

18).     Since   the  Levite  took  a  concubine  (Hffi'N 

O'Sv:?''  i'  must  be  assumed  that  he  already  had  a 
wife.  Else  why  did  he  not  make  this  woman  his 
wife  ?  For  other  grounds,  such  as  have  been  con- 
jectured, find  no  support  in  the  narrative.  Pre- 
cisely here  lies  the  blot  upon  the  character  of  the 
priest,  which  the   narrative  hints  at.     The  word 

E?2v2  is  both  etymologically  and  in  sense  identi- 
cal with  the  Greek  and  Roman  jraA\a£,  pellex, 
waWaxis ;  but  Benfey's  derivation  cannot  be  re- 
ceived.    The  sense  "  concubine,"  which  the  word 

has,  may  perhaps  be  explained  from  3  _3.  Among 
the  ancient  Greeks  also  the  taking  of  a  concubine 
was  not  considered  exactly  blameworthy,  but  La- 
ertes refrained  from  touching  Eurycleia  for  "  fear 
of  the  anger  of  his  wife"  [Odi/s.  i.  434).  The 
sequel  shows  that  the  Levite  had  done  better  if  he 
had  not  taken  a  concubine.  A  concubine  also  was 
the  ruin  of  Gideon's  family  (ch.  viii.  31). 

Ver.  2.  And  the  concubine  lusted  after  others 
beside  himself.  The  concubine  was  unchastely 
disposed.  This  is  only  a  stronger  expression  for 
what  the  moderns  mean  when  with  palliative  ex- 
tenuation they  say :  "  She  did  not  love  her  hus- 
band." Her  sensuality  was  not  satisfied  with  the 
Levite.  In  this  way  the  narrator  explains  the 
ground  of  her  leaving  him.     The  correctness  of 

n3Ti^5  was  frequently  doubted  in  former  days, 
but  only  because  the  connection  of  the  entire  nar- 
rative was  misapprehended.  H3T  is  to  play  the 
harlot,  not  only  in  act,  but  also  in  disposition  and 
spirit  (cf.  fioix*"*'"  t"  ^V  "apSla,  Matt.  v.  28)  : 
hence  used  also  of  idolatry.  In  the  added  Y1?^?, 
"  over  him," x  it  is  delicately  indicated  that  she 
did  not  so  act  as  to  be  put  away  by  him,  but  that 
she  was  of  such  a  disposition  as  to  be  unwilling  to 
live  with  him.  That  she  left  him  without  his  con- 
sent can  have  had  its  ground  only  in  her  concupis- 
cence, which  the  narrator  intentionally  designates 

by  the  term  H3T,  in  order  to  blame  the  Levite  for 
yet  running  after  such  a  woman.'-  For  it  is  writ- 
ten, Lev.  xxi.  7 :  "  A  H3T,  harlot,  and  one  pol- 

1  [The  German  is :  iiher  ihn.  The  sentence  seems  to 
mean  that  if  the  woman  had  actually  committed  adultery, 

the  fat'.t  would  have  been  expressed  by  nDTi^l  alone,  but 
that  linoe  hel  sin  existed  only  in  disposition,  the    V  !  V 


luted,  they  shall  not  take  to  wife."  Although  this 
passage  speaks  ohly  of  the  sons  of  Aaron,  it  ap 
plies  nevertheless  to  all  who,  as  the  Levitt-  says  of 
himself,  "walk  in  the  house  of  Jehovah  "  "(ver. 
18). 

And  she  was  there  some  time  (about)  four 
months.  She  had  perhaps  gone  away  under  pre- 
text of  visiting  her  parents,  and   did  not  come 

back.  The  Q',J?^  before  the  more  definite  state- 
ment of  time,  expresses  the  Latin  circiter.  As  she 
had  already  remained  away  some  four  months,  it 
looked  as  if  she  would  not  return  to  her  husband's 
house  at  all ;  wherefore  the  Levite  set  out  to  per- 
suade her  to  come  back.  He  should  not  have  dona 
this,  since  she  was  such  as  that  it  was  said  of  her : 

^?.T^?].  Her  father,  for  his  part,  ought  to  have 
sent  her  back;  for  the  Levite  had  undoubtedly  not 
failed  to  pay  him  a  morning-gift  (cf.  Ex.  xxii.  15), 
the  remembrance  of  which,  and  the  fear  that  if  his 
daughter  did  not  go  back  with  her  husband  ha 
might  be  called  upon  to  return  it,  had  probably  no 
little  influence  in  producing  the  friendliness  with 
which  he  received  him.  Such  was  also  the  ancient 
Homeric  custom,  as  illustrated  in  the  instance  of 
Hephaistos,  who  having  proved  the  infidelity  of  his 
spouse,  demands  back  the  gifts  with  which  he  had 
presented  her  father  (Odys.  viii.  318). 

Ver.  3.  And  her  husband  arose  and  wen; 
after  her.  The  Levite,  however,  desires  only  the 
woman,  not  any  money.  Hence  it  is  said  that  he 
went  after  her  in  order  to  speak  "  to  her  heart.' 
And  he  shows  it  by  bringing  two  asses  with  him,— 
one  of  them  for  her  use.  It  never  occurs  to  him 
to  think  that  her  father  may  perhaps  provide  her 
with  one.  Only  after  the  daughter  has  again 
become  friendly  to  him,  does  he  allow  her  to  lead 
him  to  her  father.  The  uncommon  hospitality 
which  the  latter  extends  to  the  Levite,  has,  it 
must  be  allowed,  a  peculiar  by-taste  to  it.  No 
doubt,  it  is  apologetic  in  its  design,  and  expressive 
of  a  wish  for  reconciliation.  This  is  clearly  enough 
expressed  in  the  acts  of  eating  and  drinking  to- 
gether. But  the  urgency  with  which  after  three 
days  he  presses  the  Levite  to  remain,  although  the 
latter  is  desirous  of  returning  home,  is  not  sanc- 
tioned by  the  delicate  laws  of  ancient  hospitality. 
The  incident  illustrates  the  beauty  of  the  words 
which  Menelaus  addresses  to  Telemachus  who 
desires  to  go  home  (Odys.  xv.  69)  :  "I  will  not 
detain  thee  here ;  for  I  also  am  angry  with  a  hos? 
who  through  troublesome  friendship  offers  trouble- 
some enmity,  for  order  is  best  in  everything. 
Equally  bad  are  both  he  who  hastens  the  guest 
who  would  stay,  and  he  who  detains  him  who 
would  go"  (cf.  Nagelsbach,  Horn.  Theol.  p.  256), 
The  injuriousness  of  exaggerated  hospitality  is 
here  also  put  in  instructive  contrast  with  the  utter 
absence  of  it,  which  it  fell  to  the  lot  of  the  Levite 
soon  to  experience. 

Vers.  4-9.  And  his  father-in-law  detained 
him.  The  carnal  nature  of  the  Levite  manifests 
itself  here  also.  Soon  after  the  reconciliation,  he 
wished  to  depart  again ;  but  be  yields,  and  spends 
three  days  in  eating  and  drinking.  On  the  fourth 
morning,  he  will  go ;  but  his  host  urges  him  first 
to  take  a  "  morsel  of  bread."  He  might  neverthe- 
less have  set  out  on  his  jour"ey ;  but  "  they  ate 
was  added  to  indicate  this.  But  how  our  author  conceive* 
this  to  be  indicated  by  the  preposition  and  sufflx,  does  not 
appear.  —  Tr.] 

2  Other  views,  as  advanced  by  Starke  and  others,  accord- 
ing to  which  this  journey  of  the  Levite  redounds  to  hll 
praise,  do  not  appear  to  have  any  support  in  the  text. 


CHAPTEE  SIX.   1-21. 


243 


and  drank,"  and  it  became  evening.  He  proposed 
indeed  to  go,  bnt  turned  about  and  remained.  On 
the  fifth  morning,  everything  is  ready  for  a  start. 
But  refreshments  are  first  taken  at  the  request  of 
the  host :  they  "  both  ate,"  and  thus  spent  the  day 
until  the  evening  approached.  No  right-minded 
Levite  manifests  himself  here.  We  hear  of  noth- 
ing but  eating  and  drinking.  It  reflects  no  honor 
on  a  man  who  "  walks  in  the  house  of  God,"  that 
he  runs  after  a  concubine,  and  cannot  resist  a 
good  table. 

When,  however,  at  last  he  sets  out,  late  in  the 
afternoon,  his  conscience  appears  to  urge  him  for- 
ward, and  to  make  him  ashamed  of  having  re- 
mained so  long.  Perhaps  he  has  no  time  to  spare, 
if  with  his  servant  and  animals,  he  is  to  rest  at 
home  on  the  Sabbath.  For  if  we  may  suppose 
that  the  reconciliation  took  place  on  the  Sabbath, 
the  first  three  days  of  feasting  would  fall  on  our 
Sunday,  Monday,  and  Tuesday :  the  "  fourth 
day"  of  ver.  5  would  be  Wednesday,  and  the 
"  fifth  day  "  our  Thursday  ;  and  he  might  think 
it  possible  to  reach  home  before  the  next  evening. 
But  in  that  case  no  time  was  to  be  lost.  His  ex- 
perience is  that  of  all  weak  and  vacillating  people : 
first,  unnecessary  delay,  and  then  overstrained 
hurry. 

The  delineation  of  these  scenes,  which  repeat 
themselves  so  frequently  in  life,  is  notwithstanding 
its  brevity,  full  of  vivacity  and  beauty.  The  guests 

continually  rise  at  early  daybreak  (1p32)  i  but 
the  evening  still  finds  them  in  the  same  place. 
The  host  is  unwearied  in  encouragements  "  to  re- 
fresh the  heart"  (^ab  IVp,  ^^7  2^);' 
but  the  "  refreshing  "  continues  until  "  the  day 
declines."  Verses  8  and  9  especially  give  a  striking 
picture  of  irresolution  and  dilatoriness.  They  per- 
mit us  to  follow  the  various  stages  of  the  day  that 
were  thus  dissipated.  With  breakfast  they  lin- 
gered along  (^narram)  until  nvn  rntsg, 

say  after  noon.  While  they  prepare  themselves 
anew  to  take  their  departure,  time  passes,  and  the 
host  begs  them  to  remain,  "  for  the  day  draweth 
toward  evening ; "  and  after  a  little  more  lingering 

—  for  this  idea  most  be  interposed  before  ni3n 

DVn  — he  is  able  to  urge,  "  spend  the  night,  for 
the  day  declines." 

It  is  unmistakably  clear  that  the  father-in-law 
meant  it  well  with  the  Levite,  when,  according  to 
general  popular  usage,  he  overwhelmed  him  with 
food  and  drink  and  pressing  invitations  ;  but  it  is 
incumbent  on  Levites  especially,  not  to  be  too 
much  taken  up  with  such  matters.  It  is  better 
that  they  make  it  evident,  that  in  case  of  necessity 
they  are  quite  content  with  a  path  lechem,  a  morsel 
of  bread. 

Vers.  10  fF.  But  the  man  would  not  tarry  that 

1  *Ti?D.  In  this  unusual  form  an  imperative  of 
courteous  respect  is  probably  indicated. 

2  It  does  not  by  any  means  follow  from  this,  however, 
that  the  city  at  that  time  did  not  yet  bear  the  name  Jerusa- 
lem. The  place  was  still  a  Jebusite  city  ;  and  that  fact  is 
here  made  prominent  in  order  to  explain  why  the  Levite 
would  not  turn  in  thither. 

8  [This  identification  of  Gibeah  with  Jeba  does  not  appear 
to  be  tenable  ;  for  it  makes  it  incomprehensible  how  the 
Levite  could  come  to  Gibeah  before  he  came  to  Ramah,  as 
the  narrative  manifestly  implies  that  he  did.  Keil  also  most 
itrangely  speaks  here  of  Gibeah  as  being  Jeba,  although  on 
Josh,  xviii.  28,  he  identifies  it  with  Tuleil  el  Ful,  a  high  hill 


night.  At  last  —  but  now  unseasonably,  for  tho 
night  is  at  hand — he  is  firm  in  his  resolution  to 
depart.  The  sun  is  already  rapidly  declining, 
when  he  comes  past  Jerusalem,  at  that  time  still 
called  Jebus,2  for  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  had  not 
yet  conquered  it  (ch.  i.  21).  He  will  not  turn  in 
"thither,  although  advised  to  do  so  by  his  servant, 
because  he  has  "  two  saddled  asses  and  his  concu- 
bine with  him," — the  repetition  of  which  state- 
ment is  thus  explained,  —  and  the  city  belongs  not 
to  Israel.  In  other  words,  he  fears  lest  in  Jebus 
the  rights  of  hospitality  might  be  violated,  and 
himself  be  plundered.  He  hastens  forward,  there- 
fore, in  order  to  reach  one  of  the  Israelitish  cities 
farther  on,  Gibeah,  perhaps,  or  Ramah.  He  suc- 
ceeds only  in  reaching  the  former.  Darkness  had 
set  in  :  it  was  unavoidably  necessary  to  stay  there 
over  night.  It  will  soon  be  seen  that  it  would 
have  been  better  if  he  had  not  suffered  himself  to 
be  detained  in  the  morning,  and  that  he  could  not 
have  done  worse  if  he  had  turned  into  the  heathen 
city. 

Vers.  15-21.  And  no  man  took  them  to  his 
house.  Gibeah  (the  present  Jeba,  Geba),3  lies  an 
hour  from  Ramah  (at  present  er-Ram),  about  two 
and  a  half  hours  from  Jerusalem,4  and  towards 
four  hours  from  Bethlehem.  It  belonged  to  Benja- 
min.    Strangers  disposed  themselves  on  the  open 

space  or  square  of  the  city  (2PP,  plated),  whence 
according  to  ancient  usage  the  residents  took 
them  to  their  own  homes.  .Elian  relates  ( Var. 
Hist.  iv.  1),  that  the  Lucanians  went  so  far  as  to 
make  the  man  who  did  not  show  hospitality  to  the 
stranger  entering  the  city  at  sunset,  liable  to  legal 
punishment.  But  here  in  Israel,  where  love  to- 
ward the  stranger  was  enjoined  by  the  law  (DeuL 
x.  19),  and  where  Job  exclaims:  "The  stranger 
did  not  lodge  in  the  street"  (ch.  xxxi.  32),  no 
one  invited  the  traveller  to  the  shelter  of  his  roof. 

This  inhospitable  disposition  was  characteristic 
only  of  the  inhabitants  of  this  city ;  for  a  man  of 
Ephraim,  who  resided  in  Gibeah,  did  not  share  it. 
When  he,  an  old  man,  came  from  the  field,  and 
saw  that  a  stranger  had  already  made  prepara- 
tions to  pass  the  night  in  the  open  air,  he  went  to 
him  with  hospitable  intent.  That  he  first  asks, 
Whence  art  thou  i  and  whither  goest  thou  ?  is 
only  the  result  of  his  astonishment  that  anybody 
should  purpose  to  pass  the  night  in  Gibeah  out  of 
doors.  For  the  city  had  probably  a  bad  name  in 
the  neighboring  region,  so  that,  when  possible,  it 
was  shunned  by  travellers.  Hence  the  question, 
Whence  comest  thou,  that  thou  hast  turned  in 
here  for  the  night  ? 

My  walk  in  life  is  at  the  house  of  Jehovah. 
The  narrator  has  hitherto  spoken  of  the  Levite 
only  as  "the  man."  The  character  of  a  Levite 
did  not  show  itself  in  him.  But  now,  in  his  an- 
swer to  the  aged  Ephraimite,  the  Levite  himself 
makes  mention  of  his  order.      I  come,  he  says, 

about  midway  between  Jerusalem  and  er-Ram.  This  place, 
fixed  upon  by  Robinson  (B.  R.  i.  577),  and  after  him  by 
Ritter  (cf.  Gage's  transl.  iv.  219),  and  many  others,  is  un- 
doubtedly the  site  of  the  ancient  Gibeah  (cf.  Smith's  Bib. 
Dice.  8.  v.  t(  Gibeah  ").  The  distance  of  Gibeah  from  Jeru- 
salem given  by  Josephus  (compare  the  next  note)  agrees 
with  this  ;  for  the  distance  of  Tuleil  el  Ful  from  Jerusalem 
is  about  two-thirds  that  of  Bethlehem  (while  Jeba  is  much 
farther,  cf.  Dr.  Cassel's  "two  hours  and  a  half").  Jeba  ii 
the  Geba  of  Scripture  (Rob.  i.  440 ;  Bib.  Diet.  s.  t 
"Geba").  — Tr.] 

4  Josephus  has  stated  the  distance  at  twenty  stadia, 
while  from  Bethlehem  to  Jerusalem  he  reckons  thlrtr  »t» 
dU. 


244 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


from  Bethlehem  bnt  reside  behind  the  mountains. 
The  purpose  for  which  he  went  to  Bethlehem,  he 
does  not  commmicate  ;  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
he  does  take  occasion  to  state  that  he  is  a  Levite 
(Josephus).  He  expresses  this  paraphrastieally, 
by  saying  that  "he  walks  in  the  house  of  God," 
namely,  as  a  servant  of  God.  He  chooses  this  form 
of  expression  in  order  to  invite  hospitality,  and  to 
place  the  refusal  of  it  in  its  worst  light.  A  man 
who  is  at  home  in  the  House  of  God,  no  one  here 
receives  into  his  house.  But  one  degeneracy  fol- 
lows in  the  wake  of  another.  When  Levites  are 
so  weak  as  he  has  shown  himself,  the  virtues  of 
others  cannot  continue  strong.  The  dignity  of 
which  it  now  occurs  to  him  to  speak,  he  himself 
should  have  respected  heretofore.  The  explana- 
tion of  -f]?n  ^  niiT  rva-nN),  as  if  it 

meant,  "  and  I  am  going  to   the  house  of  Jeho- 

1  rtifl  also  removes  the  supposition  that  the  Levite  was 
from  Shiloh.  This  is  not  to  he  assumed,  since  it  is  not  stated. 
The  above  words  give  no  more  information  concerning  the 


vah,"  is  not  only  philologically  difficult,  but  on  ac- 
count of  the  sense,  impossible.1  Whither  he  goen, 
he  has  already  said,  namely,  to  the  rear  part  of 
the  mountains;  he  wishes  now  to  say  who  he  is 
that  he  enjoys  the  dignity  of  walking  "  with  (i.  e  , 
in)  the  house  of  Jehovah,"  as  its  servant.  Hi  is 
very  anxious  to  obtain  shelter,  for  the  prospect  of 
spending  the  night  in  an  inhospitable  city  without 
a  roof  over  him,  could  not  but  fill  him  with  appre- 
hensions. The  same  cause  prevented  him  from 
continuing  his  journey.  Hence  the  humble  re- 
quest to  the  aged  householder  to  take  him  in.  He 
has  everything  necessary  with  him,  —  his  enter- 
tainer shall  be  at  no  expense.  He  speaks  of  him- 
self as  his  "  servant,"  and  of  the  woman  as  "  thy 
handmaid."  The  old  man  gladly  complies  with 
the  ancient  hospitable  usage,  according  to  which 
animals  are  fed  first,  and  the  wants  of  men  are 
attended  to  afterwards. 

birth-place  of  the  Levite,  than  is  conveyed  in  the  genera 
statement  that  he  was  a  Levite. 


The  wicked  deed  of  the  Gibeathites,  and  the  measure  taken  by  the  Levite  to  invoke  the 
judgment  of  the  nation  on  the  perpetrators. 

Chapter    XIX.  22-30. 

22  Now  as  they  were  making  their  hearts  merry,  behold,  the  men  of  the  city,  cer- 
tain [omit:  certain]  sons  of  Belial  [worthless  fellows],  beset  the  house  round 
about,  and  beat  at  the  door,  and  spake  to  the  master  of  the  house,  the  old  man, 
saying,  Bring  forth  the  man  that  came  into  thine  house,  that  we  may  know  him. 

23  And  the  man,  the  master  of  the  house,  went  out  unto  them,  and  said  unto  them, 
Nay,  my  brethren,  nay,  I  pray  you,  do  not  so  wickedly ;  seeing  that  this  man  is 

24  come  into  mine  house,  do  not  this  folly.  Behold,  here  is  my  daughter,  a  maiden 
[virgin],  and  his  concubine  ;  them  I  will  bring  out  now,  and  humble  ye  them,  and 
do  with  them  what  seemeth  good  unto  you :  but  unto  this  man  do  not  so  vile  a  thing 

25  [lit.  the  matter  of  this  folly].  But  the  men  would  not  hearken  to  him  :  so  the  man 
took  his  concubine,  and  brought  her  forth  unto  them  ;  and  they  knew  her,  and 
abused  her  all  the  night  until  the  morning  :  and  when  the  day  began  to  spring,  they 

26  let  her  go.     Then  came  the  woman  in  the  dawning  of  the  day,  and  fell  down  at 

27  the  door  of  the  man's  house  where  her  lord  was,  [and  lay  there]  till  it  was  light.  And 
her  lord  rose  up  in  the  morning,  and  opened  the  doors  of  the  house,  and  went  out 
to  go  his  way :  and  behold,  the  woman  his  concubine  was  fallen  down  at  the  door 

28  of  the  house,  and  her  hands  were  upon  the  threshold.  And  he  said  unto  her,  Up, 
and  let  us  be  going.     But  none  answered.     Then  the  man  took  her  up  upon  an 

29  [the]  ass,  and  the  man  rose  up,  and  gat  him  unto  his  place.  And  when  he  was 
come  into  his  house,  he  took  a  knife,  and  laid  hold  on  his  concubine,  and  divided 
her,  together  with  [according  to]  her  bones,  into  twelve  pieces,  and  sent  her  into 

80  all  the  coasts  [country]  of  Israel.  And  it  was  so,  that  all  that  saw  it,  said,1  There 
was  no  such  deed  done  nor  seen  from  the  day  that  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel 
came  up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  unto  this  day :  consider  of  it,  take  advice,  and 
speak  your  minds. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 


[I  V«.  80.  —  "  The  perfects  "'ttKI,  nTTl,    ver.    30,   do  not  stand   for   the   imperfecta   with  vav  consecutive, 
"1QS>T,  ^(""Pl,  as  Ilitzig.  Bertheau,  and  others  suppose,  but  are  per/ecla  consequenlia,  expressive  of  the  resolt  whiab 


CHAPTER   XIX.    22-30. 


245 


She  Levite  expects  from  his  action.  It  is  only  necessary  to  supply  a  "?*2S  •  before  TlTTl,  which  In  lively  narration 
»r  agitated  discourse  is  frequently  omitted  (cf.  e.  g.  Ex.  viii.  6  with  Judg.  Tii.  2).  The  narrator  uses  the  perfects,  instead 
Df  the  imperfecta  with  simple  T,  usual  in  clauses  expressive  of  design,  quia  quod  futurum  esse  prrevidtbat  tanquam  factum 
inimo  suo  obversabatuT  (Rosenmiiller).  The  Levite's  expectation  that  the  moral  indignation  of  all  the  tribes  will  be 
roused  against  such  wickedness,  and  will  lead  them  to  resolve  on  punishment,  is  thus  represented  not  as  a  doubtful  con- 
jecture, but  as  the  confident  anticipation  of  a  certainly  ensuing  fact11  (Keil).  It  is  impossible  to  imitate  thiB  exactly  in 
English,  but  the  better  rendering  of  the  passage  would  be  :  "sent  her  into  all  the  territory  of  Israel,  saying  [or,  as  we 
would  say,  thinking]  it  shall  be  that  all  who  see  shall  say,  There  was  no  such  deed  done  or  seen,"  etc.  Chapter  XX 
ihows,  as  Keil  remarks,  that  the  Levite  was  right  in  his  anticipations.     Dr.  Cassel  translates  as  the  E.  V.  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  22  ff.  The  narrator  is  aware  that  he  has 
to  relate  a  history  similar  to  the  one  that  occurred 
in  Sodom  in  the  days  of  Lot;  for  at  suitable  points 
his  language  takes  the  same  turns  of  expression 
(cf.  Gen.  xix.  5,  7,  8).  Lot  was  only  a  resident  in 
Sodom,  just  as  here  the  aged  Ephraimite  is  in 
Gibeah.  He,  like  the  latter,  had  invited  the  guests 
to  his  house.  The  Sodomites  surrounded  the  house, 
and  demanded  the  surrender  of  the  strangers,  as 
the  Gibeathites  do  here.  Lot  proposes  to  bring 
forth  his  daughters,  and  the  aged  host  of  our  his- 
tory makes  the  same  proposition.  The  dissim- 
ilarities, it  is  true,  are  equally  conspicuous.  The 
guests  of  Lot  were  angels,  who  frustrated  all  sin- 
ful designs:  here,  the  entertainer  receives  but  an 
imperfect  Levite.  Although  the  aged  host  cannot 
be  compared  with  the  hospitable  nephew  of  Abra- 
ham, it  must  be  admitted  that  he  acts  like  a  good 
Israelite.  The  men  of  Gibeah  were  personally 
sinners  even  beyond  those  of  Sodom,  for  they  bad 
a  God  who  does  not  tolerate  such  abominations. 
But  their  sin  was  the  outbreaking  of  individual 
depravity;  in  Sodom  it  was  the  fruit  of  the  na- 
tional life.  Hence,  both  were  punished  according 
to  their  guilt.  Benjamin  perished  almost ;  Sodom 
was  wholly  destroyed.  In  Sodom  all  sinned,  from 
the  youth  to  the  gray  head  (Gen.  xix.  4):  in 
Gibeah,  the  criminals  were  "  sons  of  wickedness," 

who,  however,  by  being  called  "l^n  ^tpDS,  "  men 
of  the  city,"  are  shown  to  belong  to  the  higher 
classes,  which  circumstance  also  accounts  for  their 
unchecked  attainment  of  such  great  proficiency  in 
evil.  This  nightly  vagabondizing  of  wanton  youth 
was  but  too  well  known  to  antiquity,  even  in  Ro- 
man times,  when  Roman  emperors  took  part  in  it. 
Here,  however,  unholy,  idolatrous  usages  seem  also 
to  have  come  into  play,  according  to  which  stran- 
gers were  abused  for  purposes  of  sensuality,  as,  con- 
trariwise, in  the  service  of  the  Syrian  Goddess 
natives  were  given  up  to  the  stranger.  It  was  a 
night-riot,  which  began  with  sunduwn  and  ceased 
with  the  morning.  Hence,  the  Levite  probably 
remained  unmolested  until  night  had  fully  set  in, 
and  could  depart  unhindered  when  the  day  broke. 
It  was  at  all  events  a  fearful  crime  in  Israel. 
The  Mosaic  law  punished  it  with  death  (Lev.  xx. 
13;  cf.  ch.  xviii.  22,  etc.).  Even  the  infringement 
of  the  rights  of  hospitality  was  in  Hesiod's  opin- 
ion, which  was  followed  by  the  later  Greeks,  a 
crime  of  equal  magnitude  with  adultery  or  the  de- 
filement of  a  father's  bed  (Nagelsbach,  NachJwm. 
Theol.  252  f.).     The  aged  host  was,  therefore,  right 

1  He  imitates  the  example  of  Lot.  Therein  lies  his  ex- 
euse.  He  seeks  to  prevent  one  sin,  and  commits  another 
without  kuowing  whether  he  can  prevent  the  first. 

2  This  act  of  his  also  testifies  to  the  degeneracy  of  the 
Levitical  body.  He  has  not  moral  strength  enough  to  die 
n  order  to  preserve  himself  from  defilement,  and  hence 
.hinks  himself  obliged  to  surrender  his  concubine.  His 
iwd  head,  therefore,  shares  in  the  guilt  of  the  crime  done 
»o  the  woman 


in  speaking  of  the  matter  as  a  i^7?^'  an  abom- 
inable crime.  But  the  savage  Benjamites  are 
no  more  willing  to  hear  reason  than  the  men  of 
Sodom  were.     Their  violent   thundering   at   the 

door  (2^9^riO),  and  their  language  (cf.  Gen. 
xix.  9),  afforded  sufficient  occasion  to  the  host  to 
fear  that  they  would  soon  break  into  the  house 
itself.  He  is  most  especially  concerned  to  shield 
the  Levite,  for  in  this  direction  lay  the  chief  crime. 
Hence,  no  requisition  is  made  upon  the  servant 
to  give  himself  up  for  his  master  —  for  that  would 
not  have  changed  the  nature  of  the  crime,  —  but 
the  host,  like  Lot,  offers  them  women,1  his  own 
daughter  being  one.  But  he  is  not  called  upon  to 
make  this  sacrifice :  the  Benjamites  will  not  have 
his  daughter ;  for  she  is  no  stranger,  and  belongs 
to  their  neighbor.  It  is  especially  to  this  offer  of 
his  daughter  that  the  opening  words  of  ver.  25 
apply:  "  they  would  not  hearken."  Hereupon  the 
Levite  takes  "his  resolution,  and  leads  forth  his  con- 
cubine. Her  heauty  pacifies  the  violent  wantons  ; 
but  she  herself  falls  a  victim  to  their  horrible  lusts. 
The  beastly  treatment  she  receives  deprives  her  of 
life.  What  an  awful  lesson !  The  same  woman, 
whose  sensuality  was  heretofore  unsatisfied,  is  now 
killed  by  excess  of  illicit  intercourse.  The  Levite 
who,  notwithstanding  her  wanton  disposition,  rum 
after  her,  is  now  obliged  to  give  her  up  to  others.2 
She  who  would  not  live  for  him,  must  now  die  for 
him.  —  In  Christendom,  also,  similar  horrors  have 
occurred.  Who  could  bear  to  write  the  history  of 
licentiousness  !  At  the  close  of  the  fourteenth  cen- 
tury a  Thuringian  knight  abducted  a  maiden. 
Placing  her  on  his  horse  behind  himself,  he  in- 
tended to  reach  Erfurt  the  same  evening  before  the 
closing  of  the  city-gates.  He  failed,  and  was  com- 
pelled to  seek  shelter  with  the  maiden  in  the  hos- 
pital situated  outside  of  the  city.  The  inmates, 
when  they  saw  the  beautiful  woman,  murdered 
the  knight,  and  abused  her  until  she  died.  The 
crime  being  discovered,  the  house  was  burned 
down,  together  with  the  criminals  (Falkenstein, 
Hist,  von  Erfurt,  p.  277). 

Vers.  29  f.  And  he  came  into  his  house.  It 
must  have  been  a  fearful  night  for  the  Levite. 
knowing  that  his  concubine  was  in.  the  power  of 
the  wanton  mob,  and  it  was  a  terrible  morning 
when  he  found  her  dead  on  the  threshold  of  the 
house.  He  had  risen  early,  and  made  better  haste 
to  get  away  from  the  house  of  his  host  than  he 
had  done  to  leave  that  of  his  father-in-law,  in  order 
to  avoid  a  meeting  with  the  inhabitants.1  His 
journey  was  a  sad  one ;  for  his  second  ass  carried 

8  [He  probably  gave  up  all  idea  of  recovering  his  concu- 
bine, as  being  hopeless.  So  Bertheau  and  Keil.  He  may 
have  entertained  plans  for  rescuing  her  iu  some  more  effec- 
tive way.  There  is  at  all  events  nothing  in  the  text  that 
justifies  us  to  suppose  that  he  went  on  his  way,  "as  if  he 
did  not  once  think  what  had  become  of  his  unhappy  com 
panion."  and  was  (( reminded  of  her  only  by  stumbling 
upon  her  lifeless  corpse,'1  as  Bush  rather  wildly  commei  u 
I  -  TB.J 


246 


THE  BOOK   OF  JUDGES. 


the  lifeless  body  of  the  dishonored  woman.  Filled 
with  these  horrors,  perpetrated  against  him  in 
Israel,  he  appeals  to  all  the  people  of  Israel.  He 
cuts  the  corpse  into  twelve  pieces,  and  sends  them 
out  in  every  direction.  Expositors  have  one  after 
another  spoken  here  of  Lucian's  narrative  (in  Tox- 
aris)  of  the  Scythian  custom  of  sitting  on  the  hide  : 
"  if  any  man  is  injured  by  another,  and  is  unable 
to  revenge  himself,  he  sacrifices  an  ox,  cuts  up  the 
flesh,  and  dresses  it ;  then  spreading  the  skin  on 
the  ground,  he  sits  down  on  it,  etc.  Whoever 
pleases  then  comes,  takes  a  part  of  the  flesh,  and 
placing  his  right  foot  on  the  hide,  makes  a  solemn 
promise  to  assist  him  to  the  utmost  of  his  abil- 
ities." It  must  be  said  that  there  is  no  analogy 
whatever  between  this  usage  and  the  act  of  the 
Levite.  The  Scythian  usage  is  the  symbolical 
formula  of  an  oath,  by  which  all  who  take  part  in 
it  promise  to  unite  themselves  into  one  body  with 
the  supplicant.  But  such  is  not  the  idea  in  our 
passage,  nor  yet  in  1  Sam.  xi.  7.  Saul  sends  out 
the  pieces  of  the  divided  oxen  with  the  threatening 
message,  that  thus  it  shall  be  done  to  the  oxen  of 
every  one  who  does  not  take  the  field  after  him. 
The  Levite  has  no  right  to  do  anything  of  this  kind. 
He  issues  no  threat  which  he  himself  can  execute. 
Nor  does  he  place  Israel  under  oath l  to  avenge 
his  wrong.  But  he  shows  the  nation  what  is  pos- 
sible within  its  borders,  and  what  may  happen  to 
any  one  in  Israel  as  well  as  it  has  happened  to 
himself.     Hence,  he  sends  not  a  divided  ox,  but 

1  It  might  be  thought  that  an  analogy  is  afforded  by  the 
lingular  oath  on  the  sacrificial  pieces  of  a  boar,  a  ram ,  and 
ft  bull,  which  Demosthenes  mentions  as  taken  by  the  accuser 


the  divided. woman.  Saul  threatens  that  the  oxen 
of  those  who  do  not  follow  him,  shall  be  cut  to 
pieces.  The  Levite  intimates  that  unless  such 
practices  are  abolished  in  Israel,  the  same  fate 
may  befall  any  woman.  He  points  to  the  anarchy 
which  breaks  out  in  Israel,  when  the  rights  of 
hospitality  are  no  longer  respected,  and  the  rights 
of  the  householder  no  longer  secure,  and  when 
heathen  abominations  like  those  of  Sodom  are 
practiced  in  the  land.'2  The  woman  cut  in  pieces 
speaks  more  loudly  than  any  other  language  could 
do.  Of  course,  a  message  accompanied  the  pieces 
of  the  body,  the  contents  of  which  are  given  in 
verse  30.  Every  one  who  saw  must  say  that  any- 
thing like  this  had  not  occurred  in  Israel  since  tb« 
nation  dwelt  in  Canaan.  It  closed  with  the  words  : 
"  Take  the  matter  to  heart,  advise,  and  speak." 

Doubtless,  the  divided  body  spake  loudly  to  all 
the  tribes  of  Israel.  But  it  spoke  not  of  repent- 
ance, but  only  of  the  necessity  of  taking  prudent 
measures  against  the  recurrence  of  similar  out- 
rages, of  which  any  one  might  himself  become  the 
victim.  And  yet  the  thing  needed  was  not  merely 
the  removal  of  the  abomination  which  was  man- 
ifest, but  the  conversion  of  the  heart,  whose  hidden 
wickedness  had  produced  the  abomination.  The 
Levite  points  to  the  sins  that  had  been  com- 
mitted ;  but  does  he  also  confess  the  share  he  him- 
self had  in  them,  and  in  the  guilt  that  attached  to 
them  ?  The  same  self-righteousness  is  revealed  by 
the  whole  people,  as  is  shown  by  ch.  xx. 

in  cases  of  murder  {adv.  Aristocratem,  p.  642) ;  but  here  alsc 
none  exists. 

2  This  sense  is  also  contained  in  the  words  of  the  Levite 
in  ch.  xx.  6. 


The  tribes  of  Israel,  convened  at  Mizpah,  resolve  to  punish  the  outrage  committed 

at  Gibeah.     They  call  on  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  to  deliver  up  the  guilty, 

but  are  met  with  a  refusal. 

Chapter   XX.  1-13. 


1  Then  all  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  went  out.  and  the  congregation  was  gath- 
ered together  as  one  man,  from  Dan  even  to  Beer-sheba,  with  [and]  the  land  of 

2  Gilead,  imto  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  in  Mizpeh  [Mizpah].  And  the  chief  [chiefs]  of 
all  the  people,  even  of  all  the  tribes  of  Israel,  presented  themselves  in  the  assem- 
bly of  the  people  of  God,  [which  assembly  numbered]  four  hundred  thousand  footmen 

3  that  drew  sword.1  (Now  the  children  [sons]  of  Benjamin  heard  that  the  children 
[sons]  of  Israel  were  gone  up  to  Mizpeh).    Then  said  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel, 

4  Tell  us,  how  was  [happened]  this  wickedness  ?  And  [the  man,]  the  Levite,  the 
husband   of  the  woman   that   was   slain,   answered  and  said,   I  came  into   [unto] 

5  Gibeah  that  belongeth  to  Benjamin,  I  and  my  concubine,  to  lodge.  And  the  men 
[lords]  of  Gibeah  rose  against  me,  and  beset  the  house  round  about  upon  me  by 
night,  and  thought  to  have  slain  me  :  and  my  concubine  have  they  forced  [humbled], 

6  that  she  is  dead  [that  she  died].  And  I  took  my  concubine,  and  cut  her  in  pieces, 
and  sent  her  throughout  all  the  country  of  the  inheritance  of  Israel :  for  they  have 

7  committed  lewdness  and  folly  in  Israel.     Behold,  ye  are  all  children  [sons]  of  Is- 

8  rael  ;  give  here  your  advice  and  counsel.  And  all  the  people  arose  as  one  man, 
saying,  We  will  not  any  of  us  go  to  his  tent,  neither  will  we  any  of  us  turn  into 

9  his  house  :  But  now  this  shall  be  the  thing  which  we  will  do  to  Gibeah  :   we  will  go 


CHAPTER  XX.   1-13.  24T 


10  up  by  lot  against  it ; 2  And  we  will  take  ten  men  of  an  hundred  throughout  all  the 
tribes  of  Israel,  and  an  hundred  of  a  thousand,  and  a  thousand  out  of  ten  thousand, 
to  fetch  victual  for  the  people,  that  they  may  do,  when  they  come  to  Gibeah  of 

1 1  Benjamin,  according  to  all  the  folly  that  they  have  wrought  in  Israel.8     So  all  the 

12  men  of  Israel  were  gathered  against  the  city,  knit  together  as  one  man.  And 
the  tribes  of  Israel  sent  men  through   [into]  all  the  tribe   [tribes]  of  Benjamin, 

13  saying,  What  wickedness  is  this  that  is  [was]  done  among  you  ?  Now  therefore 
deliver  us  the  men,  the  children  of  Belial  [worthless  fellows],  which  are  in  Gibeah, 
that  we  may  put  them  to  death,  and  put  away  evil  from  Israel.     But  the  children 


[sons 
[sons 


of  Benjamin  would  not  hearken  to  the  voice  of  their  brethren  the  children 
of  Israel. 

TEXTUAL    AND  GRAMMATICAL. 


[1  Ver.  2,  —  Dr.  Cassel  renders  this  Terse  as  follows  :  "  And  the  heads  of  the  whole  people,  out  of  all  the  tribes  o! 
Israel,  formed  themselves  into  a  Congregation  of  the  People  of  God,  which  [sc.  people]  furnished  four  hundred  thousand 
men  (namely)  footmen,  practiced  with  the  sword.'1  The  E.  V.  is  better;  only,  to  make  it  unequivocally  clear,  it  needs 
Rome  such  interpolation  as  we  have  suggested  in  the  text.  —  Tr.1 

[2  Ver.  9.  —  Dr.  Cassel  translates  :  «  And  now  in  the  matter  which  we  do  against  Gibeah,  (proceed  we)  against  it  ac- 
cording to  the  lot."  This  does  not  differ  essentially  from  the  E.  V.,  but  is  noted  here  as  explaining  what  the  author  means 
by  saying  that  the  words  "which  we  do  against  Gibeah"  are  parenthetical  (see  below).  Bertheau  and  Keil  explain: 
"This  is  the  thing  we  will  do  against  Gibeah:  against  it  with  the  lot!"  "  The  words  71123  HOI?,"  says  Keil, 
"contain  the  resolution  taken  with  reference  to  the  sinful  city,  and  are  characterized  by  the  enigmatical  brevity  of  ju- 
dicial sentences,  and  are  to  be  explained  by  the  proceedings  prescribed  by  the  Mosaic  law  against  the  Canaanites.  The 
Canaanites  were  to  be  destroyed,  and  their  land  was  then  to  be  divided  among  the  Israelites  by  lot.  Accordingly,  to  proceed 
with  the  lot  against  Gibeah,  is  to  proceed  with  it  as  with  the  cities  of  the  Canaanites,  to  conquer  and  burn  it,  and  to  divide 
Its  territory  by  lot."  One  argument  advanced  in  favor  of  this  (the  view  of  the  Peshito  :  "  we  will  cast  the  lot  orer  it !  ")  and 
against  the  current  view  (that  of  the  LXX. ),  that  the  latter  leaves  the  judgment  itself  unexpressed,  and  passes  at  once  to  a 
eubordinate  point  which  has  reference  only  to  the  execution  of  the  judgment,  has  no  great  force.  For  is  not  the  judgment 
lufflciently  expressed  in  H^i?,  "against  it!  "?  The  other,  however,  that  according  to  ver.  10,  as  ordinarily  under- 
Wood,  the  lot  decides,  not  who  shall  go  against  Gibeah,  but  who  shall  act  as  purveyors  for  the  army,  it  is  difficult  to  meet, 
sxcept  by  rendering  ver.  10  as  Dr.  Cassel  does.     Compare  the  next  note.  —  Te.] 

[3  Ver.  10.  —Dr.  Cassel's  rendering  is  as  follows:  (ver.  9b)  "proceed  we  against  it  according  to  the  lot;  (ver.  10: 
ind  take  ten  men  of  a  hundred  out  of  all  the  tribes  of  Israel,  and  a  hundred  of  a  thousand,  and  a  thousand  of  tec 
thousand,  to  take  to  themselves  provisions  for  the  host,  and  when  they  come  to  Gibeah  of  Benjamin  to  do  according  t< 
all  the  abomination  which  it  wrought  in  Israel  (i.  e.,  to  inflict  just  retribution)."  The  only  difficulty  in  this  rendering 
Is  the  expression  «  to  take  provisions  for  the  host  "  (lit.  people),  which  strikes  one  as  an  unnatural  way  of  aaying,  "  to 
take  provisions  for  themselves."  But  this  difficulty  is  less  serious  than  that  which  arises  if  we  adopt  the  common  ren- 
dering, and  explain  (as  we  must  do  in  that  case)  ver.  9  as  Bertheau  and  Keil  do  (cf.  preceding  note).  For  the  fact  that 
before  proceeding  to  extremities,  demand  is  made  for  the  surrender  of  the  guilty,  is  incompatible  with  a  prior  determimv- 
tion  to  "  cast  the  lot  "  over  Gibeah,  to  say  nothing  of  the  fact  that  such  a  confiscation  of  territory  belonging  to  Benja 
min,  as  this  is  supposed  to  imply,  would  have  been  in  glaring  conflict  with  one  of  the  most  important  laws  of  the  nation, 
that  which  rendered  land  an  inalienable  possession,  first  iu  the  family,  then  in  the  tribe.  On  the  other  hand,  it  certainly 
seems  as  if  40,000  men  must  have  been  deemed  sufficient  to  meet  the  26.700  of  Benjamin  (ver.  16) ;  and  the  statement 
of  ver.  17,  where  the  400,000  of  Israel  are  set  over  against  the  26,700  of  Benjamin,  may  be  explained  by  supposing  that 
the  narrator,  being  about  to  relate  the  terrible  losses  on  the  national  side  in  the  first  two  engagements,  wishes  to  re- 
mind the  reader  of  the  reserved  strength  from  which  the  beaten  army  could  draw  reinforcements.  —  Te.] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL.  .„   ,  .       „  !-_,__, 

j  bled  itself,  vnjvijli  ;  0r  rather,  was  convoked,  fof 

'CiJ  is  the  Greek  xa\4u>,  old  Latin  calare  (i.  e. 
curia  calabra).  It  was  formed  of  the  heads '  of  tin 
people  who  constituted  themselves  a  "  Congrega- 
tion of  the  People  of  God." 2     pn2^/T,    from 


Vers.  1 ,  2.  And  the  chiefs  of  all  the  people 
formed  themselves  into  a  congregation  of  the 
People  of  God.  The  consciousness  of  an  organic 
community  is  as  yet  fully  alive  in  Israel.  All  the 
tribes  were  horrified  at  the  crime  in  Benjamin. 
T'Urt  -,...>.....-.:-—  «c  ......£._.: — -i :_  tf-,..   


Tbe  necessity  of  conferrins:  together  is  felt  everv-  *iv>  —  in  ,\        ,      t.    •         ..   l  * 

v        r        -u  .,   ,     ?      o  mC       """j  ^al  —  J-»J,  constituere) .     It   is   not   by  way   or 

where,  from  the  north  to  the  south.     The  natural 

representatives  of  the  people  (cf.  on  ch.  i.  1 )  hasten 


to  Mizpah,  "  to  Jehovah,"  that  is   to  say,  at  the 
invitation  of  the  high-priest  in  the  name  of  Jeho- 


tautology  that  the  narrator  says  :  "  the  whole  peo- 
ple, all  the  tribes  ;  "  for  the  fact  is  to  be  made  prom- 
inent that,  except  Benjamin,  not  one   tribe  was 


vah,  against  whose  holy  law  the  crime  was  directed.  I  want;ng-  ,T.he  addition  :  "  four  hundred  thousand 
For  it  may  be  assumed  that  whenever  a  popular  i  ™eiV,  exPlains.  why  only  the  "  heads  constitute 
movement,"  which  has  Jehovah  for  its  centre,  is  '  "Je~  c°°g r^atl0n'  namely,  because  the  "  People 
spoken  of,  while  no  human  personage  as  that  of  a  !  of  G°d' .  as  a  .who'e'  ™S  l°°  numerous-  TThe 
Judge,  is  named,  the  priesthood  was  still  the  leading  :  num!)er  «  mentioned  with  reference  to  ver.  10.  Is- 
.  ___  |  rael  is  still  the  warlike  people  which  took  posses- 

•piritual  power.     An  nly,  congregation,    assem- 1  sion  of  Canaan.     The  number  of  its  sword-prac- 

1  H2S,  the  pinnaclj,  or  highest  point  of  a  building, '  2  The  regular  designation,  for  which  modern  nations 
end  thence  transferred  b>  the  heads  of  the  people,  summi.  !  have  substituted  the  less  spiritual  and  noble  terms  "  parlla- 
The  word  is  philological!  y  identical  with  the  Latin  pinna  as  ment,"  "meeting,"  "chamber,"  "house."  (How  coald 
mput  propugnaculi.  i  they  otherwise,  seeing  they  are  not  theocracies  ?  —  Te.] 


248 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


ticed  warriors  is  the  measure  of  its  greatness. 
Those  who  assemble  themselves  here  about  "Je- 
hovah," are  the  heads  of  a  community  of  warriors 
(ecelesia  miUtans.) 

Ver.  3.  And  the  sons  of  Benjamin  heard  that 
an  assembly  of  the  tribes  took  place  in  Mizpah. 
This  Mizpah  is  probably  the  same  as  that  which 
in  Samuel's  time  also  was  the  national  gathering 
place  (1  Sam.  vii.  5),  and  which  is  regarded  as 
represented  by  the  Neby  Samwil  of  the  present 
day,1  in  the  western  part  of  the  Benjamite  terri- 
tory. The  Levite,  the  narrator  informed  us,  di- 
vided his  unhappy  concubine  into  twelve  parts,  and 
6ent  them  throughout  all  Israel.  We  must  agree, 
therefore,  with  the  Jewish  expositors,  who  main- 
tain that  he  sent  a  part  to  Benjamin  also.  It  must 
likewise  be  assumed  that  Benjamin  was  invited  to 
the  council  at  Mizpah,  both  on  account  of  the 
sense  of  national  community  which  characterized 
the  period,  and  because  the  assembly  was  sum- 
moned at  a  place  within  the  borders  of  Benjamin. 
The  tribe  already  manifested  its  partisan  feeling  in 
favor  of  Gibeah.  when  it  "  heard,"  indeed,  of  what 
was  going  on,  but  neither  sent  representatives  to 
the  assembly,  nor  gave  any  token  whatever  of  indig- 
nation at  the  deed,  or  of  desire  to  exculpate  itself. 

Vers.  4-7.  And  the  man,  the  Levite,  made 
answer.  When  the  assembly  proceeded  to  investi- 
gate the  facts,  the  accuser  only  appeared  ;  the  ac- 
cused were  wanting.  The  speech  of  the  Levite  is 
remarkable  in  more  respects  than  one.  Of  the 
aged  Ephraimite  who  took  him  into  his  house,  he 
makes  no  mention  ;  for  in  order  to  a  right  judg- 
ment of  the  matter  it  is  not  necessary  to  con- 
sider whose  guest  he  was,  but  that  his  right  to 
hospitality    has    been  violated.      Hence  he   says, 

"  they  rose  against  me"  0/^) '  and,  "  they  sur- 
rounded the  house,  s  /^,  on  my  account."  The 
men  in  Gibeah  had  no  designs  against  his  host : 
he  alone  was  the  object  of  their  attack.  Nor  does 
he  speak  of  individuals  in  Gibeah,  but  of  the 
"  lords  of  Gibeah,"  as  if  the  whole  city  were 
guilty  ;  which  inasmuch  as  it  had  not  prevented 
the  excess,  was  indeed  true.  His  accusation,  "  they 
thought  to  murder  me,"  is  not  literally  in  accord- 
ance with  their  intentions,  because  he  is  ashamed 
to  speak  of  the  matter  by  its  right  name.  More- 
over, the  crime  intended  was  worse  than  death,  and 
submission  to  it  punishable  with  disgrace  and 
death.  But  he  does  not  say  that  he  himself  deliv- 
ered his  concubine  up  into  their  hands,  that  they 

1  [So  Dr.  Robinson,  B.  R.  i.  460.  Dean  Stanley  (Sin. 
mnd  Pat.  p.  212),  claims  Nebi-Samuel  for  the  "  high  place  "  of 
Gibeon,  and  transfers  Mizpah  to  Scopus  (p  222).  The  diffi- 
culty arising  from  the  fact  that  in  either  case  the  assembly 
was  held   within    the   territorial   limits   of  Benjamin,  who 


might  treat  her  according  to  their  lusts,  instead 
of  himself.  And  finally,  he  does  not  represent  tht 
violent  deed  as  directed  against  an  individual,  but 
tells  the  assembled  tribes  that  he  cut  the  woman  in 
pieces,  and  sent  her  throughout  the  whole  couutrv, 
because,  as  we  already  remarked  above,  it  was  a 
crime  against  all  Israel.  "  Behold,  all  of  you  are 
sons  of  Israel."  Without  delay,  he  desires,  that 
here  and  now,  they  consult,  and  that  they  separata 
not  before  they  have  formed  a  resolve.  He  fears 
lest  otherwise  the  impression  of  the  moment  might 
wear  off,  and  the  crime  be  left  unpunished. 

Vers.  8  ff.  And  all  the  people  arose.  The 
people  comprehend  this,  and  unanimously  proceed 
to  action.  Not  one  tribe  shall  be  entrusted  with 
the  execution  of  the  common  resolve,  but  all  shall 
take  part  in  it,  in  order  that  the  labor  and  odium 
may  not  fall  on  any  one  exclusively.     The  words 

iiyaaV  n?pS3  "^tf-  ver.  9,  are  to  be  regarded 
as  parenthetical.  The  sense  is  that  the  executive 
army  is  to  be  selected  out  of  the  tribes,  not  by  votes, 
but  according  to  the  lot.  It  is  thought  that  the 
tenth  part  of  Israel,  or  forty  thousand  men,  will  suf- 
fice ;  for  these,  who  belong  to  all  Israel,  since  they 
were  raised  out  of  the  whole,  provisions  and  equip- 
ments are  to  be  supplied.  This  is  looked  to,  in 
order  that  Israel  may  need  no  sustenance  from 
Benjamin,  while  desolating  its  territory  in  war. 

The  words  D5?b  HIS  rinr?b  remind  us  of  ch. 

vii.  8,  where  we  have    DVil   rn^TlN  ^nf?'}, 

and  make  it  probable  that  there  also  OV7  should 
be  read. 

The  expression,  ver.  11,  "  and  all  the  men  of  Is- 
rael were  gathered  together  as  one  man  CH3n, 
is  to  be  understood  of  the  army,  which,  forty 
thousand  men  strong,  was  gathered  from  all  Israel 
as  if  no  tribe  distinctions  existed.  It  was  precisely 
in  this  perfect  national  unity  and  unanimity,  that 
Israel  sought  its  right  to  take  the  step  it  had  in 
view.  From  the  consciousness  of  this  national 
character  of  the  army,  proceeded  the  effort  to  in- 
duce Benjamin  to  surrender  the  guilty,  before  the 
final  resort  to  extreme  measures.  In  the  statement 
that  "  they  sent  into  all  the  tribes  of  Benjamin," 
the  expression,  "  tribes  of  Benjamin,"  forming  as 
it  were  an  antithesis  to  the  "  tribes  of  Israel,"  is 
peculiar.     Properly  speaking,  there  could  not  be 

tribes"  within  a  "tribe";  but  since  Benjamin 
formed  an  opposition  camp,  his  "  families  "  inigh* 
be  so  named. 

nevertheless  only  "  heard  "  of  it,  is  met  by  Mr.  Qrov« 
(Smith's  Bible  Diet.,  s.  v.  tc  Mizpah  *')  by  the  apparently  no 
less  difficult  supposition  that  the  Mizpah  of  the  present  pa»- 
sage  is  to  be  located  beyond  the  Jordan.  — Tr.] 


The  war  against  Benjamin.      The  armies   of  Israel  are  twice  smitten.      The  divint 

promise  of  victory. 

Chapter   XX.  14-28. 


14  But  [And]   the  children   [sons]  of  Benjamin  gathered  themselves  together  out 
of  the  cities  unto  Gibeah,  to  go  out  to  battle  against  [with]  the  children  [sons]  of 

15  Israel.      And  the  children  [sons]  of  Benjamin  were  numbered  at  that  time  out  of 


CHAPTER  XX.  U-2».  249 


the   cities  twenty  and  six  thousand   men   that  drew  sword,  beside  the  inhabitants 

16  of  Gibeah,  which  were  numbered  seven  hundred  chosen  men.  Among  all  this 
people  there  were  seven  hundred  chosen  men  left-handed ;  every  one  could  sling 

17  stones  at  an  hair-breadth,  and  not  miss.1  And  the  men  of  Israel,  beside  Benjamin, 
were  numbered  four  hundred  thousand  men  that  drew  sword :  all  these  were  men 

18  of  war.  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  arose,  and  went  up  to  the  house  of  God 
[Beth-el],  and  asked  counsel  of  God,  and  said,  Which  of  us  shall  go  up  2  first  to 
the  battle  against  [with]  the  children  [sons]  of  Benjamin?     And  the  Lord  [Jeho- 

19  vah]  said,  Judah  shall  go  up  first.     And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  rose  up  in 

20  the  morning,  and  encamped  against  Gibeah.  And  the  men  of  Israel  went  out  to 
battle  against  [with]  Benjamin  ;  and  the  men  of  Israel  put  themselves  in  array  to 

21  fight  against  [with]  them  at  Gibeah.  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Benjamin  came 
["ent]  forth  out  of  Gibeah,  and  destroyed  [felled]  down  to  the  ground  of  the  Isra- 

22  elites  that  day  twenty  and  two  thousand  men.  And  [But]  the  people,  the  men  of 
Israel,  encouraged  themselves  [took  courage],  and  set  their  battle  again  in  array 

23  in  the  place  where  they  put  themselves  in  array  the  first  day.  (And  the  children 
[sons]  of  Israel  went  up  and  wept  before  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  until  even,  and 
asked  counsel  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  saying,  Shall  I  go  up  [advance]  again  to 
battle  against  [with]  the  children  [sons]  of  Benjamin  my  brother  ?    And  the  Lord 

24  [Jehovah]  said,  Go  up  against  him.)     And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  came  near 

25  against  the  children  [sons]  of  Benjamin  the  second  day.  And  Benjamin  went 
forth  against  them  out  of  Gibeah  the  second  day,  and  destroyed  [felled]  down  to  the 
ground  of  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  again  eighteen  thousand  men  ;  all  these 

26  drew  the  sword.  Then  all  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel,  and  all  the  people,  went 
up,  and  came  unto  the  house  of  God  [Beth-el],  and  wept,  and  sat  there  before  the 
Lord  [Jehovah],  and   fasted  that  day  until  even,  and  offered  burnt-offerings  and 

27  peace-offerings  before  the  Lord  [Jehovah].  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel 
inquired  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  (for  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  God  was  there  in 

28  those  days,  And  Phinehas,  the  son  of  Eleazar,  the  son  of  Aaron,  stood  before  it  in 
those  days,)  saying,  Shall  I  yet  again  go  out  to  battle  against  [with]  the  children 
[sons]  of  Benjamin  my  brother,  or  shall  I  cease  ?  And  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  said. 
Go  up  ;  for  to-morrow  I  will  deliver  them  into  thine  hand. 

TEXTUAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

1  Ver.  16.  —  St^n'',  from  St^H,  to  miss,  whence  jHMTSn,  a  miss,  failure,  Bin.  The  Greek  afiaprta  is  explained 
In  a  similar  way  (cf.  Ernesti,  die  Theorie  vom  Ursprung  dtr  Siinde,  p.  10,  where  the  reference  to  our  passage,  however 
most  not  be  suffered  to  mislead,  as  if  the  substantive  iHSISPT  were  read). 

T    - 

[2  Ver.  18.  —  ^  '  r"W  3?"*  s12  :  "Who  shall  go  up  for  us."  Compare  "Textual  and  Grammatical,"  note  2,  on 
tta.  i.  1.  —  Tr.] 


EXEGET1CAL   AND    DOCTRINAL. 
The  tribe  of  Benjamin   refuses   to   confess   its 


fend  itself  against  the  executionary  army  of  the 
Amphictyonic  Council.  And  it  succeeded  in  a 
degree.     The  war,  waged  against  the  unaided  city 


guilt,  and  to  surrender  the  guilty.  Defiant  and  bv  the  Thessalians,  Athenians,  and  Sicyonians, 
warlike  of  spirit,  it  prefers  to  run  the  risks  of  war.  I  assisted  by  the  wisdom  of  Solon,  lasted  ten  years. 
It  builds  its  hopes  on  the  unwieldiness  of  the  na-  Tt  was  ended  at  last  bv  an  oracular  response  and 
rional  organization,  on  differences  of  opinion,  on  '  a  stratagem  of  war,  as  in  the  case  of  the  war  with 
partisan  sympathies  in  its  favor,  and  on  the  lack  ■  Benjamin  (Paus.  x.  37).  John  Frederick  the 
of  inclination  to  war,  especially  to  a  war  waged !  Intermediate,  of  Gotha,  likewise,  expected  to  be 
against  a  brother-tribe.  It  hopes,  therefore,  not- 1  able  t0  maintain  himself  on  his  Gibeah,  the  Grim- 
withstanding  the  great  preponderance  of  force  on  ■  raenstein,  in  order  to  protect  Grumbach,  despite 
the  other  side,  to  maintain  its  ground.  And  it  is  ,  au  his  sins,  against  the  ban  of  the  German  Em- 
certain  that  by  reason  of  the  divisions  of  great  con-  pjre;  but,  like  Benjamin,  he  had  to  succumb  before 
federacies  (like  the  German),  many  a  small  gov- ,  his  brethren  (of  Saxony.  Cf.  Beck,  Gesch.  Joh. 
ernment  has  often  maintained  itself  in  defiance  j  Fried.  des  Mittleren,  i.  518).  A  similar  war  wa.s 
and  resistance.  Thus  also  in  antiquity,  the  Pho-  £hat  waged  bv  the  States  of  North  America,  in 
cian  town  of  Cnssa,  having  injured  Delphi  and .  which  the  South  defended  itself  like  Benjamin, 
therewith  wronged  the  national  sanctuary  of  the  and  w;th  even  greater  success,  albeit  that  the  mo- 
Greeks,  and  being  charged  with  other  moral  delin-  tjves  0f  the  conflict  were  less  manifest  than  they 
juenciei,1  thought  nevertheless  to  be  able  to  de-   Were  at  Gibeah. 

l  Compare  Dunker,  Bach,  des  Altertkums,  iv.  38,  who  Benjamin,  however,  would  certainly  have  given 
However  leans  towards  the  side  of  Crissa  as  against  the  up  all  thought  of  resistance,  if  the  singular  expo 
priesthood  of  Delphi.  I  sition  were  correct,  which  makf  s  all  the  40(1  one 


250 


THE   BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


men  of  Israel  to  proceed  against  Gibeah  of  Benja- 
min. This  tribe  numbered  26,700  men  fit  for 
military  service.  That  the  whole  of  this  force  is 
at  once  brought  into  the  field  is  a  matter  easily 
explained,  seeing  they  are  about  to  enter  on  a 
desperate  war.  But  that  all  the  400,000  men  of 
all  Israel  appeared  within  the  limited  district  of 
Gibeah,  is  both  in  itself  and  strategically  improba- 
ble. The  renewed  mention  of  this  number  in  ver. 
17,  is  only  designed  to  point  out  the  enormous 
superiority  of  Israel  in  the  means  of  war ;  just  as 
to  indicate  the  superior  strength  of  Prussia  over 
Denmark,  it  has  doubtless  happened  that  persons 
have  spoken  of  the  500,000  men  at  the  command 
of  the  Prussian  state.  But  it  surely  could  not 
occur  that  those  500,000  should  all  be  sent  against 
Schleswig.  Nor  is  there  anything  in  our  narrative 
to  require  a  different  conclusion  with  reference  to 
the  400,000  of  Israel.  On  the  contrary,  we  have, 
as  above  explained,  the  definite  statement  that 
40,000  men  were  chosen  for  the  war  against  Ben- 
jamin, which  still  left  the  advantage  of  numbers 
with  the  national  army.  The  expositors,  in  con- 
sidering ver.  9,  have  overlooked  the  fact  that  the 
purpose  for  which  the  lot  was  used  is  fully  de- 
scribed in  ver.  10  ;  that  the  mere  business  of  pro- 
curing provisions  was  not  of  such  a  nature  as  to 
demand  such  exactness  of  statement;  that  further, 

■^ni2?    stands  perfectly  parallel  with    nitPJ?? 

and  5733?  ESi^,  and  that  therefore  the  tenth 
part  was  levied  for  the  purpose  of  executing  judg- 
ment on  Benjamin.  It  is  also  well  known  that 
the  expression  "sons  of  Israel,"  in  ver.  19,  stands 
not  only  for  all  the  tribes,  but  is  used  in  all  the 
war  narratives  we  have  hitherto  considered,  of  sin- 
gle tribes  as  well.  Should  it  be  objected,  that 
especially  according  to  Biblical  narratives,  the  de- 
feat of  great  armies  by  small  ones  is  not  an  un- 
heard of  thing,  it  must  be  admitted  that  this  is 
indeed  true.  But  whenever  this  occurred  in  Bibli- 
cal narratives,  the  victors  had  the  cause  of  God 
and  of  truth  on  their  side.  And  whenever  that 
was  the  case  —  and  it  may  perhaps  be  assumed  to 
have  been  the  case  in  the  battle  of  Marathon  also 
—  the  victory  was  of  so  decisive  a  character  as  to 
admit  of  no  comparison  with  the  ultimately  useless 
successes  of  Benjamin.  Gibeah  means  "  height ;  " 
and  victory  remained  with  the  Benjamites,  as  long 
as  they  kept  their  position  on  the  elevated  points. 
But  what  specially  proves  that  the  narrator  views 
the  army  of  Israel  as  composed  of  40,000  men,  is 
the  circumstance  that  in  the  first  engagement 
22,000,  and  in  the  second,  18,000,  together  exactly 
40,000,  were  put  hors  de  combat.  He  mentions  this 
to  show  that  the  assurance  which  Israel  felt  that  a 
tenth  part  of  its  forces  were  enough  to  settle  with 
Benjamin,  was  not  justified  in  the  event.  Properly 
speaking,  they  are  only  ten  tribes  who  confront 
Benjamin  ;  and  40,000  are  the  tenth  part  of  their 
available  military  strength :  it  costs,  therefore,  the 
military  capacity  of  what,  in  a  certain  sense,  is  a 
tribe,  before  a  tribe  like  Benjamin  succumbs.  The 
losses  indicate,  as  we  shall  point  out  farther  on, 
that  Israel's  cause  in  this  war  was  by  no  means  a 
perfectly  pure  one. 

Vers.  14-17.  And  the  sons  of  Benjamin  gath- 
ered themselves  together  out  of  their  districts 
unto  Gibeah.     Expositors  have  taken  offense  here 

at  the  word  0>"?'?\!)  as  if  the  Benjamites  had 

only  lived  in  cities ;  but  the  narrator  designs  to 
state  that  the  fighting  men  of  Benjamin  assem- 
bled themselves  from  all  the  regions  assigned  to 


the  tribe  at  Gibeah,  as  a  fixed  point  of  rendezvous, 
and  at  the  same  time  for  the  purpose  of  protecting 
this  city,  as  the  special  object  of  attack,  against 
the  other  tribes.  The  number,  also,  here  given  of 
the  tribe,  26,700,  appeared  to  many  not  to  har- 
monize with  the  subsequent  enumeration  of  25,700 
men  (vers.  35,  47).  But  it  would  have  been  sur- 
prising, indeed,  if  after  two  engagements,  in  which 
the  enemy  lost  40,000  men,  none  of  Benjamin's  men 
had  been  found  wanting.  Accordingly,  the  correc- 
tions suggested  even  as  anciently  as  the  Septuagint 
and  Josephus,  are  less  credible  than  this  natural 
difference  between  the  beginning  and  the  end  of 
the  war.  Of  the  26,700,  only  700  belonged  to 
Gibeah,  —  a  statement  which  is  made  for  the  pur- 
pose of  testifying  to  the  strong  sense  of  commun- 
ity, through  which  the  whole  tribe  takes  up  the 
cause  of  these  few.  The  connection  of  ver.  16 
with   the  preceding  is  perfectly  clear.     It  states 

expressly  that  in  the  entire  host  (EJ?n  73?), 
there  were  700  left-handed  persons  (cf.  on  these  at 
ch.  iii.  15),  who  were  skillful  slingers.  This 
number  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  700  of  ver.  15. 
Since  the  Benjamites  defended  themselves  from 
the  heights,  the  far-throwing  slingers  were  of  spe- 
cial value.  They  were  slingers,  perhaps,  because 
they  were  left  handed.  According  to  the  Cyropce- 
dia,  Cyrus  caused  all  who  were  incapable  of  bear- 
ing other  arms  to  exercise  themselves  in  slinging. 
The  Persians  were  fond  of  using  slingers  (Brisson, 
p.  658).  The  friend  of  the  younger  Cyrus,  Mith- 
ridates,  had  four  hundred  slingers,  "exceedingly 
light  and  active"  (Anab.  iii.  3,  6).  The  Rhodian 
slingers  threw  leaden  plummets  to  a  great  distance. 
The  Achaeans  struck  any  part  of  the  body  at  which 
they  aimed.1  That  skill  in  slinging  was  not  con- 
fined to  Benjamin,  is  evident  from  David's  victory 
over  Goliath.  What  a  terrible  weapon  the  sling 
could  be,  is  demonstrated  by  the  narrative  of  Livy 
concerning  the  Balearians,  who  hurled  such  a 
quantity  of  stones,  like  thickest  hail  showers,  on  the 
approaching  Carthaginian  fleet,  as  to  prevent  them 
from  casting  anchor  (xxviii.  37). 

Ver.   18.  And  the  sons  of  Israel  arose,  and 
went    up    to    Bethel,    and    inquired    of   God 

(□^rOSB).  It  is  Jehovah  who  answers,  but  their 
inquiry  was  addressed  to  Elohim.  It  is  no  wonder 
that  they  suffered  a  defeat.  For  they  approach 
God  without  sorrow  because  they  are  obliged  to 
fight  against  a  brother  tribe,  without  repentance 
for  their  own  sins,  and  without  sacrifices.  It  is 
thus  that  heathen  inquire  of  their  Elohim,  just  as 
oracles  were  consulted  from  a  desire  to  know  the 
future.  Nor  do  they  ask  whether  they  should 
advance,  whether  they  shall  conquer  —  that  they 
regard  as  certain  —  but  who  shall  first  attack. 
The  answer  was  :  "  Judah  shall  go  up  first."  It 
conforms  in  scope  to  their  inquiry.  They  have 
not  inquired  concerning  victory ;  hence,  the  an- 
swer contains  nothing  to  inform  them  on  this 
head.  Had  any  other  tribe  but  Judah  been 
named,  that  might  have  been  interpreted  into  an 
assurance  of  victory ;  for  Judah  always  marched 
at  the  head  (cf.  on  ch.  i.  2).  Judah's  leading  on 
the  present  occasion  is,  therefore,  only  in  accord- 
ance with  the  common  rule.  The  divine  response 
abstains  from  giving  any  information  beyond  what 
the  inquiry  called  for.  This  circumstance  might 
have  been  a  warning  to  them,  had  they  been  less 

1  Liry  (xixviii.  29)  describes  their  slingers  quite  fully 
Non  capita  solum  hostium  vulnerabantt  sed  quern  Locum  de» 
rinassent  cris. 


CHAPTER  XX.  14-28. 


251 


eertain.  Bat  does  not  the  inquiry  and  its  answer 
countenance  tbe  opinion  that  all  the  troops  of  all 
the  tribes  (400,00(1  men)  were  encamped  before 
Gibeah  1  But  in  that  case,  we  would  have  to  sup- 
pose, in  accordance  with  the  analogy  of  ch.  i.  2, 
that  Judah  began  the  conflict  alone,  which  is 
against  the  whole  narrative.  On  the  contrary,  the 
question  rather  serves  to  show  that  the  40,000 
represented  all  Israel  on  a  decimated  scale ;  that 
they  were  not  chosen  according  to  tribes,  but  by 
the  lot,  out  of  the  whole  people.  Consequently, 
the  internal  relations  of  this  army  differed  from 
what  they  would  have  been,  had  the  selection 
been  according  to  tribes.  Hence  arose  the  ques- 
tion :  Who  shall  take  the  lead  in  this  army  ?  God 
replies:  "Judah,  —  as  always";  and  leaves  every 
other  question  undetermined. 

Vers.  19  ff.  And  the  men  of  Israel  arrayed 
themselves   for   battle   with   them   at   Gibeah 

pO"1?*5>  they  formed  a  np^lJO,  an  acies,  cf.  on 
ch.  vi.  26),  but  the  untrustworthy  character  of 
their  generalship  demonstrates  itself  thereby.  With- 
out a  definite  plan  of  attack  and  of  the  war,  they 
dispose  themselves  before  the  city,  and  hope  thereby 
to  terrify  the  threatened  tribe.  But  the  latter  falls 
upon  them,  and  institutes  a  great  destruction  among 

them.  The  text  says:  ^t?\?  WH^l  The 
word  nnttf  is  not  only  to  kill,  but  also  to  wound, 
and  to  disable  for  war. 

It  is  to  be  assumed,  as  a  matter  of  course,  al- 
though it  is  not  stated,  that  after  this  first  engage- 
ment, and  again  after  the  second,  some  time 
elapsed  before  a  renewal  of  hostilities  took  place. 
It  was  unnecessary  to  state  a  fact  that  lay  in  the 
nature  of  the  case.  The  troops  were  reinforced 
after  the  first  defeat,  although  no  thought  was  as 
yet  entertained  of  adopting  a  different  battle-plan, 
by  which  the  enemy  might  be  drawn  away  from 
his  favorable  position  on  the  height.  They  deter- 
mined, however,  not  to  await  an  attack  this  time, 

as  formerly,  but  to  make  one  (!0"?iT*i  vers.  24)  ; 

for  this  is  the  meaning  of  2^|7  (to  advance  at  a 
rapid  march),  when  used  of  movements  in  war. 
But,  more  important  still,  they  begin  to  lose 
their  self-righteous  assurance.  They  go  to  Bethel, 
and  weep  there.  They  see  how  lamentable  it  is,  to 
fight  against  their  brethren,  and  lose  thousands 
of  lives  in  such  a  war.  They  begin  to  doubt 
whether  their  cause  be  a  good  one ;  and  hence 
they  inquire  not  now  of  an  Elohim,  after  the  man- 
ner of  the  heathen,  but  of  their  Elohim,  Jehovah. 
The  answer  says  :  "  Go  up,"  but  gives  no  promise 
of  victory.  In  this  way,  the  battle  is  renewed,  — 
not  on  the  next  day  after  the  former,  but  for  the 
second  time.  They  still  fail  to  conquer  Gibeah  : 
the  attack  is  repulsed,  and  the  loss,  though  not  as 
great  as  before,  is  yet  terribly  large. 

The  divine  reply,  "  Go  up,"  was  not  a  deception 
of  the  people,  but  was  grounded  in  the  sad  neces- 
sity of  chastizing  both  parts  of  the  warring  nation. 

1  [How  came  the  ark  to  be  at  Bethel,  if  the  one  national 
Mootuary  was  at  Shiioh  ?  Hen^stenberg  (Keil  also)  replies 
Jut  it  was  brought  from  Shiioh  to  Bethel  during  the  war. 


Had  the  answer  been,  "  Go  not  up,"  Israel  woulc 
have  abandoned  the  war,  and  Benjamin  would  have 
been  hardened  in  the  pride  of  successful  resistance. 
Israel,  on  the  other  hand,  by  going  up  and  expe- 
riencing defeat,  would  again  be  brought  nearer  to 
the  right  spirit,  which  alone  insures  victory  in 
Israel.  Accordingly,  in  ver.  26  this  spirit  mani- 
fests itself.  Proceeding  to  Bethel,  they  no  longer 
merely  weep  there,  and  lament  over  the  calamity 
of  waging  war  on  their  brethren  at  such  fearful 
sacrifices,  but  they  abide  in  prayer  and  fasting.  It 
is  a  sign  of  the  penitence  which  they  feel  on  ac- 
count of  their  own  sins.  Hitherto,  they  had  fought 
against  Benjamin  under  a  feeling  of  their  own  su- 
perior virtue,  as  if  among  their  opponents  there 
had  been  only  sinners,  among  themselves  none  but 
Israelites  without  guile.  Theirs  was  an  exhibi- 
tion of  Pharisaism,  which  modern  history  also  car- 
ries on  all  its  pages,  in  which  there  is  much  to  be 
read  of  "moral  indignation,"  but  very  little  of 
"  righteous  self-  knowledge  "  and  repentance. 
Through  the  command  of  Lev.  xxiii.  26-32,  con- 
cerning the  day  of  atonement,  on  which  all  nour- 
ishment was  to  be  withheld  from  the  body,  fasting 
became  in  Israel  the  sign  of  confession  of  sin  and 

repentance.  The  word  C12  occurs  here  for  the 
first  time :  in  the  Books  of  Samuel  it  is  the  ordi- 
nary term.  The  great  victory  of  Samuel  over  the 
Philistines  is  also  preceded  by  a  fast  ( 1  Sam.  vii. 
6).  The  signification  of  the  word  resembles  that  of 

rW511  a  fast,  from  H3V  (Lev.  xxiii.  27:  DJTaS'!) 
oppressit,  domuit,  and  is  etymologically  connected 
with  the  Sanskrit  dam,  Saftav,  domare,  to  tame. 
The  Sanskrit  praja,  to  fast,  is  in  like  manner  ex- 
plained as  meaning  "  to  restrain  one's  self"  (cf. 
Benfey,  Gr.  Gram.  ii.  202).  — Israel  now  performs 
what  it  had  formerly  neglected :  it  brings  burnt- 
offerings  and  peace-offerings  —  the  burnt-offerings 
as  penitential  offerings  for  the  past,  as  in  ch.  vi. 
26  if;  the  peace-offerings  as  votive  offerings  with 
reference  to  the  future  (Lev.  vii.  16).  The  Jewish 
expositors  have  a  beautiful  explanation.  They  de- 
rive □''Kibtp  from  Dibit?,  peace.  The  last  word 
of  the  law  concerning  sacrifices  in  Lev.  vii.  is 
D^P^tT  (ver.  37) ;  and  peace,  say  they,  is  the 
close  of  every  holy  life  (cf.  my  Irene,  p.  37.) 

In  vers.  27  and  28,  the  words:  "for  the  ark 
....  those  days,"  form  a  parenthetical  interca- 
lation, which,  as  we  shall  point  out  below,  is  of 
importance  in  determining  the  time  to  which  the 
events  belong.  After  repentance  and  sacrifices, 
Israel  inquires  now  for  the  third  time  of  the  Urim 
and  Thummim ;  and  now  only,  when  they  who 
inquire  are  in  the  right  frame  of  mind,  and  receive 
a  full  and  favorable  reply,  is  the  statement  inserted 
that  the  ark  of  the  covenant  was  at  Bethel,1  and 
that  Phinehas,  the  grandson  of  Aaron,  was  the 
high-priest.  And  now  the  answer  is  not  simply 
"  Go  up,"  but  conveys  the  assurance,  "  to-morrow 
will  I  give  victory  into  thine  hand." 

For  his  arguments,  see  Pentateuch,  u.  87-89,  By  land's  edtttoa 
For  our  author's  explanation,  see  the  "  Oonolodmg  Note, 
on  p.  269.  —  Ta.] 


252  THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


The  men  of  Israel  recommence  hostilities.     By  feigned  flight  they  draw  the  Benja 
mites  away  from  Gibeah,  which  thereupon  falls  into  their  hands  and  is  de- 
stroyed, together  with  nearly  the  whole  tribe. 

Chapter   XX.    29-48. 

29  30  And  Israel  set  liers  in  wait  round  about  Gibeah.  And  the  children  [sons]  of 
Israel  went  up  against  the  children  [sons]  of  Benjamin  on  the  third  day,  and  put 

31  themselves  in  array  against  Gibeah,  as  at  other  times.  And  the  children  [sons]  of 
Benjamin  went  out  against  the  people,  and  were  [thus]  drawn  away  from  the  city ; 
and  they  began  to  smite  of  the  people,  and  kill,1  as  at  other  times,  in  the  highways, 
of  which  one  goeth  up  to  the  house  of  God  [Beth-el],  and  the  other  to  Gibeah  in 

32  the  field,  about  thirty  men  of  Israel.  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Benjamin  said. 
They  are  smitten  down  [omit :  down]  before  us,  as  at  the  first.  But  the  children 
[sons]  of  Israel  said.  Let  us  flee,  and  draw  them  from  the  city  unto  the  highways. 

33  And  all  the  men  of  Israel  rose  up  out  of  their  place,  and  put  themselves  in  array 
at  Baal-tamar :  and  the  liers  in  wait  of  Israel  came  forth  [also]  out  of  their  places 

34  [place],  even  out  of  the  meadows  [naked  fields]  2  of  Gibeah.  And  there  [they] 
came  against3  Gibeah  ten  thousand  chosen  men  out  of  all  Israel,  and  the  battle 

35  [there]  was  sore  :  but  they  [;.  e.  the  Benjamites]  knew  not  that  evil  was  near  them.  And 
the  Lord  [Jehovah]  smote  Benjamin  before  Israel:  and  the  children  [sons]  of  Is- 
rael destroyed  of  the  Benjamites  that  day  twenty  and  five  thousand  and  an  hundred 
men  :  all  these  drew  the  sword. 

36       So  [Now}  the  children  [sons]  of  Benjamin  saw  that  they  [the  §on«  of  Israel]  were 
smitten  : 4  for  the  men  of  Israel  gave  place  to  the  Benjamites,  because  they  trusted 

37  unto  the  liers  in  wait  which  they  had  set  beside  [against]  Gibeah.  And  the  liers 
in  wait  hasted,  and  rushed  upon   Gibeah  ;  and  the  liers  in  wait  drew  themselves 

38  along,5  and  smote  all  the  city  with  the  edge  of  the  sword.  Now  there  was  [omit : 
there  was]  an  [the]  appointed  sign  between  the  men  of  Israel  and  the  liers  in  wait 
[was],  that  they  should  make  a  great  flame  [cloud — lit.  elevation,  rising]   with  [of] 

39  smoke  rise  up6  out  of  the  city.  But  when  [omit:  when]  the  men  of  Israel  re- 
tired in  the  battle,  [and]  Benjamin  began  to  smite  and  kill  of  the  men  of  Israel 
about  thirty  persons:  for  they  said.  Surely  they  are  smitten  down  [omit:  down] 

40  before  us,  as  in  the  first  battle.  And  when  the  flame  [cloud  —  cf.  ver.  38]  began  to 
arise  up  out  of  the  city  with  [omit :  with]  a  pillar  of  smoke,  the  Benjamites  looked 
behind  them,  and  behold,  the  flame  [whole]  of  the  city  ascended  up  [in  flames,  or  smoke] 

41  to  heaven.  And  when  [omit :  when]  the  men  of  Israel  turned  again,  [and]  the 
men  of  Benjamin  were  amazed  [confounded]  :  for  they  saw   that  evil  was  come 

42  upon  them.  Therefore  they  turned  their  backs  before  the  men  of  Israel  unto  the 
way  of  the  wilderness  ;  but  the  battle  overtook  [or,  pursued  after]  them  ;  and  them 

43  which  came  out  of  the  cities  they  destroyed  in  the  midst  of  them.'  Thus  [omit: 
Thus]  they  [They]  inclosed  the  Benjamites  roundabout,  and  chased  them,  and  trode 
them  down  with  ease  [at  their  place  of  rest.]  over  against  [as  far  as  before]  Gibeah 

44  toward  the  sun-rising  [on  the  east.]  8     And  there  fell  of  Benjamin  eighteen  thou- 

45  sand  men  ;  all  these  were  men  of  valour.  And  they  turned  and  fled  toward  the 
wilderness  unto  the  rock  of  Rimmon :  and  they  gleaned  of  them  in  the  highways 
five  thousand  men  ;  and  pursued  hard  after  them  unto  Gidoin.  and  slew  two  thou- 

46  sand  men  [more]  of  them.    So  that  all  which  fell  that  day  of  Benjamin  were  twenty 

47  and  five  thousand  men  that  drew  the  sword  ;  all  these  were  men  of  valour.  But 
six  hundred  men  turned  and  tied  to  the  wilderness  unto   the   rock  Rimmon,  and 

48  abode  in  the  rock  Rimmon  four  months.  And  the  men  of  Israel  turned  again  upon 
[returned  unto]  the  children  [sons]  of  Benjamin,  and  smote  them  with  the  edge 
•  >f  the  sword,  as  well  the  men  of  every  city,0  as  the  beast  [cattle],  and  all  that  came 
to  hand  [was  found]  :  also  they  set  on  fire  all  the  cities  that  they  came  to  ("that 
were  found]. 


CHAPTER   XX.  29-48.  253 


TEXTUAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

II  Ver.  31.  —  D^bbn  D3?nn  niSnb  ^bns1 :  "and  they  began  to  smite  of  the  people,  slain  ;  "  i.  e  ,  they 
•  T-:        tt  »  -    :         -T- 

imote  so  that  the  smitten  became  slain.  D^VVl"!  is  the  accusative  of  closer  definition.  Dr.  Cassel  takes  it  as  nomL 
native  :  "  They  began  to  smite,  (so  that,)  as  at  the  former  times,  slain  of  the  people  were  [•".  «.,  lay]  on  the  highways,  of 
which  one,'1  etc.     Similarly  in  ver  39.  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  33.  —  H13?Q.     Dr.  Cassel :  Btisse,  "nakedness";  cf.  his  remarks  below.     The  Peshito  read  nn3?Q}  a 

2sve  ;  the  LXX.  in  Cod.  Ales-,  and  the  Vulgate,  ^HpQ,  «  from  the  west."     Fiirst  (in  his  Lexicon)  defines  n"1^?Q  as 

"forest,"  and  derives  it  from  a  conjectural  root  TT^V  III.,  to  sprout  thickly,  to  which  he  also  assigns  the  participle  in 
Pb.  xxxvii.  35.  Keil  seeks  to  remove  the  difficulty  of  connecting  the  ambuscade  with  an  open,  treeless  plain,  by  remark- 
ing that  "  the  words  of  the  text  do  not  require  us  to  suppose  that  the  forestless  region  was  the  place  of  hidiDg,  but  may 
be  so  understood  as  to  affirm  that  the  ambuscade,  having  broken  up  from  its  hiding-place,  advanced  against  the  city  from 

the  forestless  region."'  But  he  has  failed  to  notice  that  the  participle  n*Oft  speaks  precisely  of  the  "breaking  forth," 
and  leaves  the  idea  of  "  advancing  ou  the  city  "  entirely  unexpressed.  —  Tr  ] 

[8  Ver.  34.  —  ni?3!lb  "T^iip  ^3ST  :  "  from  before  Gibeah."  Dr. Cassel,  like  the  E.  V.,  has  "against."  Bertheau 
anya  :  "  The  ambuscade,  consisting  of  ten  thousand  chosen  men,  came  r  from  straight  before  '  Gibeah  ;  whither  they  came,  is 
not  stated,  but  from  the  connection  it  appears  that  they  attacked  the  Benjamites,  who  were  fighting  at  some  distance  from 
the  city,  in  the  rear."  Keil  adopts  the  same  explanation.  But  it  is  manifest  from  vers.  37,  38,  and  especially  vers.  40 
and  41,  that  Bertheau  aud  Keil  are  wrong,  and  the  E.  V.  and  our  author  right."  —  Tr.] 

[4  Ver.  36.—  ?D23  ^3  'jp'On"^^  ^S^*}-  Witn  this  Terse>  a  new  and  more  detailed  account  of  the  conflict  be- 
gins. So  Bertheau,  Keil, "and  Biiusen,  us  well  as  our  author.  To  indicate  this  to  the  eye,  we  have  introduced  a  new 
paragraph  division  into  the  text.  Bertheau  and  Bunsen  agree  with  our  author  that  the  subject  of  ^D33  is  "the  sons  of 
Israel."  According  to  Keil,  "  the  sons  of  Benjamin  saw  that  they  were  smitten,  and  that  the  men  of  Israel  only  gave 
way  before  them  because  they  depended  on  the  ambuscade  which  they  had  laid  against  Gibeah.  They  became  aware  of 
this  when  the  ambuscade  fell  on  their  rear."  But  this  is  inconsistent  with  ver.  37,  and  certainly  with  ver.  40.  Ver.  86 
is  a  restatement  of  ver.  32,  introductory  to  the  detailed  account  that  now  follows-  —  Ta.] 

[5  Ver.  37-  —  TTtTD^I.      Dr.  Cassel  translates :  "  and  the  ambuscade  overpowered  and  smote  the  whole  city  ; "  and 

adds  in  a  foot-note  :  "  In  the  sense  of  Job  xxiv.  22  :  irQ3  D"^2S  T|t?tt.  But  there  the  word  probably  meani 
"  to  hold  fast,  to  preserve,"  cf.  Delitzsch  in  locum.  It  seems  better  to  take  it  here  in  the  sense  "  to  march,  advance,"  of. 
ch.  iv.  6.  — Ta.] 

[6  Ver.  38-  —  DDibVnb  3^n.  The  first  of  these  words  being  taken  as  the  apocopated  hiphil  imperative,  a 
mixture  of  the  direct  with  the  indirect  address  arises  from  the  suffix  of  the  third  person  in  the  second  word.  Dr.  CasBel 
avoids  this  by  declaring  D"irT  to  be  an  apocopated  infinitive  (see  below) ;  but  it  is  better  to  admit  the  existence  of  ft 
grammatical  inaccuracy.  —  Tr.] 

[7  Ver.  42.  —  "OiflS  VPS  DWntPB  D^^na  ~ltt?S\  Dr.  Cassel  translates:  «  and  they  of  the  cities 
{through  which  Benjamin  came)  destroyed  them  in  the  midst  of  them."  Compare  the  exegetical  remarks.  Keil:  "  Th« 
words  O'HVnQ  "'tE'SI  can  only  be  an  appositional  explanation  of  the  suffix  in  Vfi7l(2^27'7>  in  the  sense  :  Benja 
min,  namely,  they  who  out  of  the  cities  of  Benjamin  had  came  to  the  aid  of  Gibeah  (cf.  vers.  14  f),  u  «.,  all  Benjamites 
The  following  V^  EWHtTQ  is  a  circumstantial  clause  illustrative  of  the  preceding  D^fl  HEn^^n  :  '  in  that 
they  (the  men  of  Israel)  destroyed  him  (Benjamin)  in  the  midst  of  it.'     The  singular  suffix  in  "OifO,   refers  not  to 

Benjamin  —  for  that  yields  no  tolerable  sense  —  but  to  the  preceding  T2'lSn  TfT^TT  •  *  'n  '^e  m*a'st  0I" tne  way  **>  the 
desert.'  " 

[8  Ver.  43-  —  This  verse  continues  the  description   begun  in  ver.  42,  by  means  of  an  animated  constractio  asyndetu 

}P**32"iHS  ^HPlS,  they  surrounded  Benjamin  (by  throwing  out  bodies  of  men  on  his  flanks) ;,  ^lnp^T^i"!,    pui 

sued  after  him  ;  Jin^~T"Tn  nn*0?P,  fell  upon  and  trode  him  down  at  his  resting-place  (that  is,  when,  exhausted,  he 

halted  to  take  breath  —  HmDE,  accusative  of  placed  and  this  pursuit  and  slaughter  continued  until  the  pursuers, 
who  started  from  some  distance  north  of  Gibeah  (ver.  31j,  had  come  south  "  as  far  as  before  Gibeah  on  its  eastern  side.' 
There  the  remnant  of  the  pursued  found  means  to  turn  northward  again,  ver.  45  ;  and  were  again  pursued  as  far  as 
Gidoin  (a  place  evidently  somewhere  between  east  of  Gibeah  and  Rimnion).  Compare  our  author's  remarks  below,  which, 
however,  indicate  a  slightly  different  conception  on  some  points  —  Tr.] 

[9  Ver.  48.  —  DHQ  "WD.  Dr.  Cassel  renders  :  "  everything  of  the  city,  to  the  cattle  and  whatever  else  was  found ;  " 
and  adds  the  following  note :  "  Many  MSS.,  and  the  more  recent  expositors,  point  DHQ,  men,  and  yet  it  cannot  be  said 
that  with  nDHB,  this  forms  an  altogether  suitable  antithesis,  inasmuch  as  it  still  fails  to  express  the  idea  that  every- 
thing was  put  under  the  ban  of  destruction.  The  pointing  DHD  finds  support  in  Josh.  viii.  24;  x.  20,  where  simiUi 
Instructions  DS/nj  are  spoken  of."  —  Ta.] 


254 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


EXEUETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  29  ff.  From  the  determined  purpose  of  the 
ten  tribes  to  prosecute  the  war,  Benjamin  should 
have  taken  occasion  to  yield.  Since  Israel  con- 
tinued tirm.  notwithstanding  severe  losses,  it  might 
have  concluded  that  it  was  impossible  to  resist 
permanently.  It  might  also  have  observed  that 
another  spirit  animated  this  second  war,  and  that 
Israel  had  become  thoroughly  in  earnest  to  com- 
plete the  work  it  had  taken  in  hand.  Another  in- 
terval of  time  had  manifestly  passed  by.  After 
the  dissolution  of  the  first  army,  Israel  had  to  levy 
a  new  one  (illustrative  examples  of  this  may  be 
found  in  the  North  American  Union  war).  Ac- 
cordingly, the  first  engagements  are  spoken  of  to- 
gether, as  the  "former"  or  the  "first"  war  (vers. 
32  and  39).  The  tribes  of  Israel  now  first  con- 
clude to  use  strategic  arts.  This  circumstance  in- 
cidentally affords  data  which  enable  us  to  obtain  a 
somewhat  clearer  idea  of  the  theatre  of  the  war. 
Gibeah  lay  high ;  the  attack  of  the  Israelites  came 
from  the  direction  of  Bethel,  i.  e.,  from  the  North- 
west. Two  highways  are  mentioned,  along  which 
the  sons  of  Benjamin  advanced  to  meet  the  assail- 
ants—one leading  to  Bethel,  the  other  to  "  Gibeah- 
in-the-Field "  (a Lower,  or  Field-Gibeah  in  contrast 
with  the  Higher,  or  Mountain-Gibeah) .  The  Is- 
raelites allure  the  Benjamites,  rendered  unwary  by 
former  successes,  farther  and  farther  away  from  the 
heights  and  the  city.  It  is  expressly  said  that  Ben- 
jamin went  out  "  to  meet  them  "  (rftOj?/,  ver.  31 ). 
They  offer  scarcely  any  resistance,  but  retreat,  con- 
stantly followed  by  Benjamin,  who  already  sees  the 
triumphs  of  the  first  two  battle  days  reenacted  (ver. 
32).  Not  until  they  have  reached  Baal  Tamar,1 
doubtless  at  a  suitable  distance  from  Gibeah,  do 
they  halt,  and  wait  for  the  prearranged  signal  from 
other  divisions  who  lay  in  ambush,  and  who  were 
to  attack  the  city  as  soon  as  the  Benjamites  should 
leave  it.     The  place  from  which  the  city  is  thus 

suddenly  attacked,  is  called  3723THED  (ver.  33). 

The  Jlasora  has  pointed  H^SQ,  evidently  deriving 

the  word  from  T^1?'  t0  ^e  naked,  an<i  intending 
to  express  by  it,  as  Raschi  also  explains,  the 
"  nakedness  "  of  Gibeah,  i.  e.,  its  accessible  part. 

The  Targum  renders  it  by  "1??',l? ;  the  same  term 

by  which  it  constantly  renders    ^"^i  so  that 

possibly  it  may  have  read  rQ^P-  It  might 
then  be  understood  of  the  point  where  the  hill 
slopes  down  to  the  plain,  and  thus  becomes  more 
accessible.     The  simplest  way  would  be  to  point 

so  as  to  read  i"HJ?J3,  a  cave,  as  the  Septuagint  also 
seems  to  do:  Maapcr)e/3ct  (instead  of  Mapaayefit). 
North  of  the  present  Jeba,  with  which  our  Gibeah 
is  held  to  be  identical,  runs  the  Wady  es-Suweinit. 
It  comes  from  Beitin  and  el-Bireh,  to  the  North- 
west, and,  after  passing  Jeba,  runs  between  high 
precipices,  in  one  of  which  is  a  large  cavern  called 
Jaihah  (Rob.  i.  441). 

Vers.  34,  35.  And  they  came  against  Gibeah, 
ten  thousand  men.     We  now  first  learn  the  nu- 

1  Movers  (Phiinizier,  i.  661)  proposes  to  explain  this  name 
rf  a  place  by  means  of  the  Phoenician  Tamyros,  Zeus  De- 
marus.  Raschi,  on  the  other  hand,  connected  it  with  the 
district  of  Jericho. 

2  This  is  supported  by  the  Syriac-Hexaplar  version  of 

paui  of  Telia,  which  has  N3~)J70  ^Q,  which  gives  ul  a 
tendering  of  arb  hvaprnv  (Rordam,  p.  179). 


merical  strength  of  the  ambuscade,  the  placing  of 
which  was  stated  in  ver.  29.  It  is  scarcely  neces 
sary  to  point  out  that  we  have  here  another  fact 
going  to  show  the  improbability  of  a  besieging 
army  of  400,000,  who  could  have  surrounded  the 
whole  of  Gibeah  on  all  sides.  Verses  34  and  35, 
while  telling  about  the  ambuscade,  take  occasion 
briefly  to  indicate  the  result  of  the  whole  war,  ac- 
cording to  what,  as  Keil  justly  observes,  is  a  char- 
acteristic practice  of  Hebrew  historiography.  This 
is  followed,  vers.  36  ff.,  by  the  more  detailed  ac- 
count derived  from  ancient  notes.  Nor  is  there 
any  discrepancy  between  ver.  35,  which  states  ihat 
there  fell  25,100  men  of  Benjamin,  and  ver.  46, 
which  gives  the  number  at  25,000.  The  latter  is 
only  the  sum  total  of  the  three  round  numbets  of 
vers.  44  and  45,  namely,  1 8,000  +  5,000  -4-  2,000 ; 
and  the  great  fidelity  of  the  report  shows  itself  in 
the  fact  that  since  the  hundred  over  25,000  is  not 
divided  between  the  round  sums,  it  is  also  not  in- 
cluded in  the  sum  total,  although  according  to  ver. 
35  its  inclusion  was  only  a  matter  of  course.  The 
artifice  employed  by  the  Israelites  against  the  Ben- 
jamites, was  in  a  different  way  also  used  against 
Shechem  by  Abimelech.  Similar  stratagems,  prac- 
ticed by  Scipio,  Hannibal,  and  others,  are  collected 
by  Frontinus  (Stralagematicon,  lib.  iii.  cap.  10). 
Scipio  besieged  a  city  in  Sardinia,  feigned  to  take 
to  flight  before  the  besieged,  and  when  they  thought- 
lessly followed  him,  per  eos,  quos  in  proximo  occulta- 
verat,  oppidum  invasit. 

Ver.  36.  For  the  sons  of  Benjamin  had 
thought  that  they  were  smitten.  The  "  they  " 
of  this  sentence  refers  to  the  Israelites,  as  appears 
from  the  succeeding  words.  The  verse  is  a  re- 
capitulation of  verse  32,  and  is  therefore  to  be 
rendered  by  the  pluperfect:  "they  had  seen  or 
thought."  They  actually  had  seen,  that  the  sons 
of  Israel  allowed  themselves  to  be  smitten. 

Ver.  38.  And  the  appointed  sign  between  the 
men  of  Israel  and  the  hers  in  wait  was,  that 
they  should  cause  a  great  cloud  of  smoke  to 

rise  up  out  of  the  city.     The  form  ^~}y}  ^~}^} 

Dnibpnb)  is  explained  by  the  phrase   H2")n 

'OD??,  Ps.  li.  4,  where  the  keri  has  2~}T}-  For 
not  the  imperative  only,  but  precisely  the  infinitive, 
which  forms  it  (both  n2"in),  is  also  apocopated 
into  2^n,  and  takes  in  consequence  the  adverbial 
signification,  "strongly,"  "very,"  "fully."  The 
word  is  quite  essential  to  the  full  understanding 
of  the  sentence.  The  men  of  the  ambuscade  are 
to  cause  a  great  pillar  of  smoke,  like  that  of  a 
burning  city,  to  ascend,  such  as  could  not  fail  to 
be  visible  at  a  distance,  and  could  not  be  mistaken. 
Bertheau  must  have  overlooked  this,  when  he  pro- 
posed to  remove  the  word  out  of  the  text.8 

Vers.  42  ff.  And  the  inhabitants  of  the  cities 
destroyed  them  in  the  midst  of  them.  The  men 
of  Benjamin  fled ;  and  in  flight  passed  through  the 
cities  that  lay  in  their  course.  Thereupon  the  in- 
habitants of  these  cities  also  arise,  and  slay  the 
fugitives  in  their  midst.  The  same  thing  occurs 
in  all  wars,  when  disorganized,  fugitive  troops  must 
pass  through   the  enemy's  land.*     Other  expla- 

8  On  the  very  ancient  false  reading  D7.H)  too"*  "■ 
some  Hebrew  MSS.  and  in  the  LXX.,  cf.  Keil.  Paul  of 
Telia  has  given  a  gimilftr  rendering  in  his  Syriao  versiot 
(Bordam,  p.  180). 

*  [Bat  on  this  occasion  the  fugitives  do  not  pass  through 
the  enemy's  land.    Tram  flnt  to  last,  ifhether  fighting  or 


CHAPTER  XXI.  1-14. 


255 


cations,  such  as  have  been  given  from  time  im- 
memorial, do  not  appear  to  harmonize  with  the 
connection  and  the  language.  The  clause  cannot 
refer  to  those  who  burned  the  city ;  for  how  could 

they  be  called  "D^SUS  "iBfr?"?  Equally  in- 
comprehensible is  the  reason  for  using  this  ex- 
pression, and  the  13V13  connected  with  it,  if 
Bertheau's  explanation,  which  Keil  has  mostly  fol- 
lowed, be  adopted ;  for  the  pursuit  and  inclosure 
are  first  delineated  in  ver.  43.  The  explanation 
of  Le  Clerc  appears  to  me  to  come  nearest  the 
6ense  :  Cum  confugerunt  Benjaminitce  ad  urbes  alio- 
rum  Israelitarum,  ab  iis  occidebantur.  Only,  this 
must  not  be  understood  of  a  systematic  application 
for  refuge  on  the  part  of  the  Benjamites ;  but  of 
the  natural  phenomenon  that  against  a  pursued 
and  smitten  foe  everything  rises  up.  The  narrator 
evidently  points  in  this  way  to  the  embittered  feel- 
ings against  Benjamin  which  everywhere  prevailed. 
In  proportion  to  Benjamin's  former  overbearing 
haughtiness,  is  his  present  experience  of  misery. 
Not  only  is  the  hostile  army  continually  at  his 
heels,  but  he  meets  with  enemies  everywhere.  Only 
the  wilderness,  which  he  endeavors  to  reach  by 
fleeing  in  an  eastern  and  northeastern  direction  to- 
ward the  Jordan,  promises  safety.  But  before  he 
arrives  there,  divisions  of  his  men  are  cut  off  and 


fleeing,  Benjamin  moves  on  his  own  soil  within  his  own 
boundaries  ;  and  this  fact  makes  our  author's  explanation 


surrounded  (-l-^?,  ver.  43).  The  pursuit  is  un 
ceasing  (this  is  the  sense  of  HTOfi  VtD'H'in, 
"  they  chase  his  rest,"  hence  probably  the  hiphil ) , 
he  scarcely  thinks  to  be  able  to  take  breath  for  a 
moment,  before  they  are  behind  him  again  :  in  this 
way  he  is  driven  until  he  finds  himself  within  the 
limits  of  the  wilderness  east  of  Gibeah.  Einally, 
still  pursued  as  far  as  an  unknown  place  called 
Gidom,  a  remnant  of  his  shattered  hosts  finds  an 
asylum  in  the  rock  Rimmon,  northeast  of  Gibeah 
and  below  Ophra,  for  the  modern  Rummon,  lying 
high,  on  a  rocky  Tell,  on  the  north  side  of  the 
great  Wady  el-'Asas,  is  held  to  be  the  rock  Rim- 
mon of  our  narrative  (Rob.  iii.  290;  ii.  440). 

Six  hundred  men  of  the  whole  tribe  saved  them- 
selves on  that  rock.  All  the  rest  fell  slain  by  the 
hands  of  brethren.  They  owed  their  safety  to  the 
eagerness  of  their  pursuers  to  turn  back,  and  de- 
stroy everything  belonging  to  Benjamin,  cities, 
houses,  and  herds.  The  cities  are  put  under  the 
ban  and  burned,  like  Jericho  and  other  cities  of 
the  enemy.  The  Israelites  are  even  more  severe 
in  their  treatment  of  Benjamin,  than  the  Pythia 
was  toward  the  hostile  Crissa,  which  was  to  be 
"warred  on  by  day  and  by  night  and  be  made 
desolate,  and  whose  inhabitants  were  to  become 
slaves."  But  grief  and  regret  did  not  fail  to 
come. 

of  the  last  clause  of  ver.  42  Impossible.     Of.  note  7 
«  Textual  and  Grammatical."  —  Ie.J 


Israel  bewails  the  desolation  of  Benjamin,  and  takes  measures  to  preserve  the  tribe 

from  extinction.     Twelve  thousand  men  are  sent  to  punish  Jabesh-  Gilead  for 

not  joining  in  the  war  against  Benjamin,  and  to  take  their  daughters 

for  wives  for  the  remaining  Benjamites. 

Chapter  XXI.  1-14. 

1  Now  the  men  of  Israel  had  sworn  in  Mizpeh  [Mizpah],  saying,  There  shall  not 

2  any  of  us  give  his  daughter  unto  Benjamin  to  wife.  And  the  people  came  to  the 
house  of  God  [Beth-el],  and  abode  [sat]  there  till  even  before  God,  and  lifted  up 

3  their  voices,  and  wept  sore ;  And  said,  0  Lord  [Jehovah,]  God  of  Israel,  why  ia 
this  come  to  pass  in  Israel,  that  there  should  be  to-day  one  tribe  lacking  in  Israel  ? 

4  And  it  came  to  pass  on  the  morrow,  that  the  people  rose  early,  and  built  there  an 

5  altar,  and  offered  burnt-offerings,  and  peace-offerings.  And  the  children  [sons]  of 
Israel  said,  Who  is  there  among  all  the  tribes  of  Israel  that  came  not  up  with  [in] 
the  congregation  unto  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  ?  For  they  had  made  a  great  oath  con- 
cerning him  that  came  not  up  to  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  to  Mizpeh,  saying,  He  shall 

6  surely  be  put  to  death.     And  the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  repented  them  for  Ben- 

7  jamin  their  brother,  and  said,  There  is  one  tribe  cut  off  from  Israel  this  day.     How 
i     shall  we  do  for  wives  for  them  that  remain,  seeing  we  have  sworn  by  the  Lord  [Je- 

8  hovah],  that  we  will  not  give  them  of  our  daughters  to  wives  ?  And  they  said, 
What  one  is  there  of  the  tribes  of  Israel  that  came  not  up  to  Mizpeh  to  the  Lord 
[Jehovah]  ?  and  behold,  there  came  none  to  the  camp  from  Jabesh-gilead  to  the 

9  assembly.     For  the  people  were  numbered  [mustered],  and  behold  there  were  none 

10  of  the  inhabitants  of  Jabesh-gilead  there.  And  the  congregation  sent  thither  twelve 
thousand  men  of  the  valiantest,  and  commanded  them,  saying,  Go  and  smite  the 
inhabitants  of  Jabesh-gilead  with  the  edge  of  the  sword,  with  the  women  and  the 

11  children.     And  this  is  the  thing  that  ye  shall  do,  Ye  shall  utterly  destroy  every 

12  male,  and  every  woman  that  hath  lain  by  man.     And  they  found  among  the  inhab 


256 


THE   BOOK  OF  JUUGES. 


itants  of  Jabesh-gilead  four  hundred  young  [women,]  virgins  [,]  that  had  known 
no  man  by  lying  with  any  male  :  and  they  brought  them  unto  the  camp  to  Shiloh, 

13  which  is  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  And  the  whole  congregation  sent  some  to  speak 
to  the  children   [sons]   of  Benjamin   that  were  in  the  rock  Riinmon,  and  to  call 

14  peaceably  unto  them  [and  offered  (lit.  called)  peace  to  them].  And  Benjamin  came 
again  [returned]  at  that  time  ;  and  they  gave  them  wives  [the  women]  which  thev 
had  saved  alive  of  the  women  of  Jabesh-gilead :  and  yet  so  they  sufficed  them  not 
[but  they  found  not  for  them  so  many].1 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

1  T«r.  14.  —  ] 3  DH  V  ^StJO'tOl.     Here,  as  in  Ex.  x.  14,  ^3  means  tot ;  and,  In  general,  it  answers  to  tantut, 
tmni,  tot,  where  to  "  so  "  we  add  the  appropriate  adjective. 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Vers.  1-4.  Now  the  men  of  Israel  had  sworn 
U.  Mizpah.  Our  author  now  informs  us,  by  way 
of  supplementing  the  preceding  narrative,  of  two 
oaths  taken  by  the  congregation  at  the  beginning 
of  the  war.     All   Israel   premised,  man  by  man 

(hence  the  expression  vJOtiT  E^S),  that  they 
would  not  give  their  daughters  as  wives  to  any 
men  of  Benjamin.  They  abrogated  the  connubium 
(the  right  of  intermarriage)  with  the  tribe.  They 
determined  to  treat  Benjamin  as  a  heathen  people, 
or  as  heathen  nations,  in  the  absence  of  special 
treaties  (iirtya/ila),  were  accustomed  to  look  upon 
each  other.  There  were  instances  of  heathen 
tribes  who  did  not  at  all  intermix.  Such  cases 
were  found  among  Germanic  tribes  also,  until 
Christianity  had  fully  conquered  them.  It  was  the 
church  that  brought  East-Goths  and  West-Goths, 
Aiflo-Saxons  and  Britons,  Franks  and  Eomans, 
to  look  upon  each  other  as  tribes  of  one  Israel. 
Very  great,  therefore,  must  have  been  the  indigna- 
tion of  the  collective  Israel,  when  they  thus,  as  it 
were,  cast  Benjamin  out  of  their  marriage  cove- 
nant. The  Romans  once  (335  B.  c.)  punished 
certain  rebellious  Latin  tribes  by  depriving  them 
of  the  privileges  of  connubia,  commercia,  et  concilia 
(Liv.  viii.  14).  The  Latins  were  subject  tribes: 
Benjamin,  a  brother-tribe  with  equal  rights.  It 
might  be  thought  that  such  a  resolve  was  of  itself 
sufficient  to  punish  Benjamin  for  its  immorality. 
But  is  it  not  probable  that  in  that  case,  the  tribe, 
through  its  stubbornness,  would  have  sunk  alto- 
gether into  heathenism?  It  must  be  admitted, 
however,  that  double  punishment  was  too  severe. 
For  it  was  to  punish  the  guilty,  not  to  destroy  a 
tribe,  that  Israel  had  taken  the  field.  This  they 
now  perceive  —  but  too  late  —  after  their  passion- 
ate exasperation  has  subsided.  They  now  sit  be- 
fore the  altar  of  God  in  Bethel,  weeping  over  the 
calamity  that  has  taken  place.  The  consequences 
of  their  unmeasured  severity  are  now  perceived. 
To  what  purpose  this  utter  destruction  by  the 
sword  of  everything  that  pertained  to  the  brother 
tribe  ?  When  Benjamin  took  to  flight,  would  it 
not  have  sufficed  then  once  more  to  demand  of  him 
the  surrender  of  the  guilty  ?  Would  he  still  have 
resisted,  when,  helpless,  he  sought  the  wilderness 
for  refuge  ?  To  what  purpose  the  slaughter  of  the 
Hying  ?  the  indiscriminate  use  of  sword  and  fagot 
in  the  cities  1  Israel  has  cause  for  weeping  ;  for 
it  feels  the  horrors  of  civil  war.  Humanity  and 
kindness  are  frightened  away  when  brethren  war 
with  brethren.  The  worst  and  most  detestable 
crimes  are  committed  against  nations  by  them- 
lelves,  under  the  influence  of  foolish  self-deception, 


when  they  fall  victims  to  internal  strife.  The  ex- 
asperation of  the  feelings  puts  moral  causes  entirely 
out  of  sight.  Leaders,  says  Tacitus,  are  then  less 
valued  than  soldiers  (Hist.  ii.  29,  6 :  "civilibus  belli* 
ptus  militibus,  guam  diicibus  licere  ").  Israel  may 
bewail  itself  before  God,  but  it  cannot  accuse  its 
leaders.  The  Urim  and  Thummim  approved  the 
punishment  of  Benjamin,  but  not  the  oaths  and 
cruelty  with  which  it  was  accompanied.  However, 
if  Israel  in  this  war  furnishes  an  illustrative  in- 
stance of  the  results  to  which  defiant  obstinacy  (on 
the  side  of  Benjamin),  and  fanatical,  self-exasperat- 
ing zeal  (on  the  side  of  the  ten  tribes),  may  lead, 
it  is  also  instructive  to  note  that  it  knows  that  such 
doings  must  be  repented  of.  It  builds  an  altar, 
and,  as  before  the  war,  brings  burnt-offerings  and 
peace-offerings,  the  first  expressive  of  penitence  for 
the  past,  the  other  of  vows  for  the  future. 

Vers.  5  ff.  For  they  had  made  a  great  oath 
concerning  whoever  came  not  up  to  Jehovah 
to  Mizpah,  saying,  He  shall  surely  be  put  to 
death.  Israel  here  also  again  clearly  shows  in  its 
history,  what  every  man  may  observe  in  his  own 
experience  :  that  repentance  and  vows,  with  refer- 
ence to  past  precipitate  sin,  have  scarcely  been  ex- 
pressed, before  the  same  thing  is  done  again,  and 
frequently  with  the  same  blind  zeal  which  was  just 
before  lamented.  At  that  time,  when  indignation 
at  the  outrage  in  Gibeah  filled  all  hearts,  an  oath 
was  also  taken  that  every  city  in  Israel  that  did 
not  send  its  messengers  to  the  national  assembly, 
consequently  took  no  part  in  the  general  proceed- 
ing against  Benjamin,  which  was  the  cause  of  God, 
should  be  devoted  to  destruction.  Such  a  city  was 
considered  to  make  itself,  to  a  certain  extent,  an 
ally  of  Benjamin,  and  to  be  not  sufficiently  dis- 
turbed by  the  outrageous  misdeed,  to  give  assur- 
ance that  it  did  not  half  approve  of  it.  Amid  the 
terrible  events  of  the  war,  it  had  been  neglected  to 
ascertain  whether  all  cities  had  sent  messengers ; 
it  is  only  now,  when  the  question  how  to  help 
Benjamin  up  again  without  violating  the  oath,  is 
considered,  that  the  absence  of  messengers  from 
Jabesh-Gilead  is  brought  to  light.  And  what  is 
it  proposed  to  do  !  To  deal  with  that  city  as  they 
have  just  lamented  to  have  dealt  with  Benjamin. 
In  order  to  restore  broken  Benjamin,  another  and 
in  any  view  far  less  guilty  city  is  now  to  be 
crushed.  The  reconciliation  of  breaches  made  by 
wrath  is  to  be  made  by  means  of  wrath.  The 
people  lament  that  they  have  sworn  an  untimely 
oath,  and  instead  of  penitently  seeking  to  be 
absolved  from  it  before  God,  undertake  to  make  it 
good  by  executing  another,  equally  hard  and  se- 
vere, and  that  after  "Jehovah  has  smitten  the 
rebellious  (eh.  xx.  35),  and   peace  has  been  l» 


CHAPTER  XXI.   15-25. 


257 


stored.  Jabesh-Gilead  was  a  valiant  city,  full  of 
men  of  courage,  as  all  Gileadites  were.  According 
to  Eusebius,  it  lay  six  miles  from  Pella.  Robin- 
eon  searched  for  its  site  along  the  Wady  which 
still  bears  the  name  Yabis,  and  thought  it  proba- 
bly that  now  occupied  by  some  ruins,  and  called 
ed-Deir  (Bibl.  Res.  iii.  319).  The  citv  must  have 
been  one  of  importance  in  Gilead.  This  is  indi- 
cated by  the  fact  that  the  Ammonite  king  Nahash 
selects  it  as  his  point  of  attack  (1  Sam.  xi.).  In 
the  history  of  Jephthah  its  name  does  not  occur. 
When  king  Saul  hears  of  the  danger  threatened 
the  city  by  Nahash,  he  cuts  a  yoke  of  oxen  into 
pieces,  which  he  sends  throughout  all  Israel  with 
a  summons  to  march  to  the  relief  of  Jabesh-Gilead, 
and  obtains  a  splendid  victory.  These  historical 
notices  suggest  some  noteworthy  connections. 
Against  Jabesh  the  Israelites  now  undertake  the 
execution  of  a  severe  vow,  in  order  to  assist  Ben- 
jamin. At  a  later  date,  Saul  of  Benjamin  collects 
Israel  around  him,  in  order  to  deliver  Jabesh. 
Jabesh  does  not  come  when  summoned  against 
Benjamin,  by  the  pieces  of  the  slain  woman.  Un- 
der Saul,  Benjamin  summons  the  whole  people 
for  Jabesh,  by  the  pieces  of  a  sacrificial  animal. 

Israel  sends  12,000  valiant  warriors  against 
Jabesh-Gilead  —  a  duly  proportioned  number,  if 
40,000  proceeded  against  Benjamin.  The  com- 
mander of  these  troops  is  instructed  to  destroy 
everything  in  Jabesh,  except  the  virgin  women, 
who  are  to  be  brought  away,  in  order  to  be  given 
to  Benjamin.  It  may  be  assumed,  however,  that 
these  instructions  are  to  be  so  taken  as  that  the 
army  was  to  compel  Jabesh  to  deliver  up  its  virgin 
daughters  as  an  expiation  for  its  guilt,  under 
threat  of  being  proceeded  with,  in  case  of  refusal, 
according  to  its  proper  deserts.1  For  it  is  not 
stated  that  the  destruction  was  carried  out ;  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  under  Saul,  Jabesh  is  again,  to 
all  appearances,  the  chief  city  of  Gilead.    The  four 

1  The  Athenian  Ionians,  according  to  Herodotus  (i.  146), 
stole  Carian  women  for  themselves,  and  killed  their  fathers. 
Hence,  he  says,  the  Milesian  custom  which  did  not  permit 
women  to  eat  with  their  husbands,  or  to  call  them  by  their 
names. 


hundred  virgins  are  then,  so  to  speak,  the  expia- 
tory sacrifice  for  the  guilty  in  Gilead.  As  such, 
and  because  the  Gileadites  were  forced  to  surren- 
der them,  they  could  be  given  to  Benjamin,  not- 
withstanding the  oath,  which  contemplated  a  vol- 
untary giving.  The  words  in  ver.  14,  "  which 
they  had  saved  alive  of  the  women  of  Jabesh- 
Gilead,"  do  not  imply  that  the  others  were  actu- 
ally lulled,  but  indicate  that  these  were  those  who 
in  any  event  were  to  be  permitted  to  live  for  the 
sake  of  Benjamin,  and  who  by  their  life  —  not  as 
frequently  among  the  heathen,  by  their  death  — 
helped  to  preserve  the  existence  both  of  the  Gilead- 
ites, from  whom  they  were  taken,  and  of  the  Ben- 
jamites,  to  whom  they  were  given.2  Inasmuch  as 
they  were  preserved  alive  when  it  was  possible  to 
kill  them,  they  were  no  longer  considered  to  be 
such  as  ought  not  be  given  to  Benjamin.  How 
instructive  is  all  tliis !  Israel  will  not  break  its 
oath,  but  evades  it  after  all !  If  Gilead  had  de- 
served death,  then  its  virgin  women  could  not  be 
allowed  to  live.  If  these  may  be  saved  alive,  why 
should  the  children  die  3  The  Gileadites  may  not 
give  their  daughters  voluntarily,  but  do  not  the 
Israelites  give  them  for  them  ?  The  surrender  of 
these  maidens  is  indeed  a  violent  solution  of  the 
dilemma  in  which  Israel  finds  itself,  but  the  solu- 
tion is  only  formal,  not  natural.  The  Greeks  also, 
in  cases  of  oaths  thoughtlessly  made,  whose  per- 
formance was  maliciously  insisted  on,  had  recourse 
to  formal  exegesis,  which  avoided  the  real  exe- 
cution (cf.  Herod,  iv.  154;  Nagelsbach,  Nachhom. 
TheoL,  p.  244).  For  the  sake  of  kindness  to  Ben- 
jamin, Israel  here  thought  itself  justified  in  adopt- 
ing a  similar  course ;  for  in  order  not  to  weaken 
the  sanctity  of  oaths,  they  evaded  that  which  they 
had  sworn  by  a  formal  compliance.  They  soon 
found  occasion  to  repeat  the  process ;  for  the  four 
hundred  Gileaditish  maidens  were  not  sufficient. 

2  [Unfortunately,  this  exegesis  has  not  a  particle  of  sup- 
port in  the  text.  To  use  a  favorite  phrase  of  the  Ger- 
mans on  such  occasions,  it  is  entirely  aus  der  Luft  gcgrif- 
fin.  —  Tb..] 


A  second  expedient   to   supply  the   Benjamites  with  wives :    they  are  instructed  t» 

carry  off  the  maidens  in  attendance  at  one  of  the  feasts 

held  periodically  in  Shiloh. 

Chapter  XXI.  15-25. 


15  And  the   people  repented  them  for  Benjamin,  because  that  the  Lord  [Jehovah] 

1 6  had  made  a  breach  in  the  tribes  of  Israel.  Then  [And]  the  elders  of  the  congre- 
gation said,  How  shall  we  do  for  wives  for  them  that  remain,  seeing  the  women  are 

17  destroyed  out  of  Benjamin?     And  they  said,  There  must  be  an  inheritance  fofcthem 

18  that  be  escaped  of  Benjamin,1  that  a  tribe  be  not  destroyed  out  of  Israel.  How- 
beit,  we  may  not  give  them  wives  of  our  daughters  :  for  the  children   [sons]  of 

19  Israel  have  sworn,  saying,  Cursed  be  he  that  giveth  a  wife  to  Benjamin.  Then  they 
said,  Behold,  there  is  a  feast  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  in  Shiloh  yearly  [,]  in  a  place 
[omit :  in  a  place]  which  [namely,  shiloh]  if  on  the  north  side  of  Beth-el,  on  the  east 
side  of  the  highway  that  goeth  up  from  Beth-el  to  Shechem,  and  on  the  south  of 

20  Lebonah.    Therefore,  they  commanded  the  children   [sons]  of  Benjamin,  saying,  Go, 

17 


258 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


21  and  lie  in  wait  in  the  vineyards  ;  And  see,  and  behold,  if  [when]  the  daughters  of 
Shiloh  come  out  to  dance  in  dances,  then  come  ye  out  of  the  vineyards,  and  catch 
you  every  man  hi?,  wife  of  the  daughters  of  Shiloh,  and  go  to  the  land  of  Benjamin. 
And  it  shall  be,  when  their  fathers  or  their  brethren  come  unto  us  to  complain 
[contend],  that  we  will  say  unto  them,  Be  favourable  unto  them  for  our  sakes 
[Give  us  them  kindly]  :  because  we  reserved  [took]  not  to  [omit :  to]  each  man  his 
wife  in  the  war  ; 2  for  ye  did  not  give  unto  them  at  this  time,8  that  ye  should  be 
guilty.  And  the  children  [sons]  of  Benjamin  did  so,  and  took  them  wives,  accord- 
ing to  their  number,  of  them  that  danced,  whom  they  caught :  and  they  went  and 

24  returned  unto  their  inheritance,  and  repaired  the  cities,  and  dwelt  in  them.  And 
the  children  [sons]  of  Israel  departed  thence  at  that  time,  every  man  to  his  tribe 
and  to  his  family,  and  they  went  out  from  thence  every  man  to  his  inheritance. 

25  In  those  days  there  was  no  king  in  Israel :  every  man  did  that  which  was  right  in 
bis  own  eyes. 


22 


23 


TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 
[1  Ver.  17.  —  ID^in  V  niw^/D  nt&H\        D*.  Cassel  renders  :  "  A  portion  of  escape  yet  remains  fol  Benjamin,' 

i  e.t  &  means  of  delivering  the  tribe  from  extinction.  This  agrees  well  with  the  context,  bnt  is  expressed  somewhat  sin- 
gularly. Keil :  t{  '  Possession  of  the  saved  shall  be  for  Benjamin,'  t.  «.,  the  territory  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  shall  con- 
tinue to  be  &  separate  possession  for  those  Benjamites  who  have  escaped  the  general  slaughter.'*  But  this  is  not  only 
incongruous  with  the  context,  but  puts  a  meaning  into  the  words  which,  as  they  stand,  they  cannot  have.  It  seems  to  me 
that  the  better  interpretation  is  as  follows :  In  ver.  15,  the  people  lament  that  a  tribe  is  broken  off.  Thereupon  the 
elders  meet  for  consultation.  It  is  agreed  that  the  only  thing  needed  to  avert  the  catastrophe,  lamented  by  the  people  af 
if  it  had  already  taken  place,  is  a  supply  of  wives.  "  There  Is  a  possession  of  escaped  to  Benjamin,"  say  the  elders 
(ver.  17),  "  and  a  tribe  will  not  be  destroyed  out  of  Israel  "  (as  the  people  lament).  '■  We,  it  is  true,  cannot  give  them 
our  daughters  (ver.  18),  but  behold  there  is  a  feast  in  Shiloh  "  (ver.  19) Tfi.] 

[2  Ver.  22.  —  PlOn  V32.  Our  author  translates  :  alt  Kriegsbcute,  i.  «.,  as  captives  of  war,  cf.  the  exegetical  remarks 
below.     It  seems  better  to  refer  the  word  to  "  the  war  "  against  Jabesh-Gilead Tb.] 

[I  Ver.  22 TOtDSW   HV3.    The  word  H^S,  rendered  "  at  this  time  "  by  the  E.  V.,  belongs  to  the  last  clause 

of  the  verse.  The  two  clauses  together  are  well  rendered  by  Dr.  Cassel :  "  for  you  have  not  given  them  to  them,  in 
which  ease  (n3?3)  you  would  be  guilty."  He  adds  in  a  foot-note:  "  j"iy3  as  in  ch.  xiii.  23 ;  '  in  which  ease  he 
would  not  have  caused  us  to  hear  things  like  these.'  "    Bertheau  refers  also  to  Num.  xxiii.  23 —  Tb.] 


BXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  15  ff.  The  fact  that  the  number  of  maidens 
obtained  at  Jabesh-Gilead  proved  insufficient,  fur- 
nishes the  occasion  of  another  consultation,  insti- 
tuted by  the  "elders  of  the  congregation"  (ver. 
16),  in  order  not  to  let  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  die 
out.  Finally,  they  hit  on  one  last  piece  of  deliv- 
erance (H^b?  llWny  that  is  yet  left  them: 
they  conclude  to  point  out  to  the  Benjamites  a 
method  by  which  they  may  seize  for  themselves 
those  wives,  which  Israel,  by  reason  of  its  oath, 
cannot  give  them.  The  inhabitants  of  Jabesh, 
likewise,  did  not  give  their  daughters ;  they  were 
forcibly  taken  from  them,  and  turned  over  as 
booty  to  the  sons  of  Benjamin. 

Shiloh  was  the  scene  of  a  periodically  recurring 
*east,  at  which  the  maidens  assembled  from  all  re- 
gions, and  executed  dances  in  certain  fixed  places. 
For  the  sake  of  these  places,  and  to  enable  the 
Benjamites  to  reach  the  proper  locality  without 
exciting  particular  attention,  an  exact  description 
of  the  situation  of  Shiloh1  is  added.2  For  that 
it  is  not  gone  into  for  the  sake  of  Shiloh  itself,  is 
evident  from  the  fact  that  such  descriptions  are 
not  elsewhere  customary.      The   Benjamites  are 

1  The  description  may  still  be  recognized,  since  Robinson 
seems  to  have  discovered  Shiloh  in  Seilun,  and  Lebonah 
in  Lubban.  The  description  of  Shiloh  as  "  Shiloh  which 
Is  in  the  land  of  Canaan  "  (ver.  12),  is  more  peculiar.  This 
was  only  the  full  name  of  the  place,  cf.  Josh.  xxi.  2,  and 

ixii.  9,  where  it  is  named  in  the  same  way.     Cf.  Lugdunum 

3mU»vorum. 


told  of  the  vine-hills  that  enclose  the  dancing-places. 
There  they  are  to  wait,  concealed  in  the  thickets, 
until  the  maidens  come  forth ;  when  they  are  to 
rush  upon  them,  seize  each  a  wife,  and  return 
with  them,  along  the  well-known  roads,  southward 
over  Rimmon,  to  their  territory,  now  again  peace- 
ably held  by  them.  The  Benjamites  appear  to 
have  directed  attention  to  the  consequences  of 
such  an  exploit,  and  the  ill-will  of  fathers  and 
brothers  likely  to  be  engendered  by  it.  But  the 
elders  of  the  congregation  quiet  their  apprehen- 
sions, and  say :  — 

Ver.  22  ff.  When  their  fathers  or  their  breth- 
ren come  unto  us  to  contend.  Verse  22  also 
has  experienced  the  most  singular  expositions. 
The  Syriac  and  Arabic  versions  have  substituted 

^T??  for  :!3rli?7'  wherein  Studer  proposes  to  fol- 
low them.  Others,  as  Bertheau,  deem  it  necessary 
to  leave  out  the  words  npiT7?33  .  .  .  .  S7  ",3. 
Keil  thinks  that  the  words  express  the  sense  of  the 
Benjamites,  as  if  they  had  uttered  them.  And 
yet  the  matter  is  clear.  The  Benjamites,  having 
recent  experience  of  the  consequences  of  lawless- 
ness, are  apprehensive  of  new  troubles,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  proposed  seizure.     The  elders  quiet 

2  [Better  Keil :  "  The  exact  description  of  the  situation 
of  Shiloh  serves  to  show  that  it  was  peculiarly  adapted  for 
the  execution  of  the  advice  given  to  the  Benjamites,  who 
after  seizing  the  maidens,  could  easily  escape  into  their  ter 
ritory  by  the  highway  leading  from  Bethel  to  Shechem,  with 
out  being  apprehended  by  the  citizens  of  Shiloh  "  —  Tft.] 


CHAPTER  XXI.    15-25. 


259 


their  fears,  and  say :  No  doubt,  the  fathers  or 
brothers  will  come  and  contend  warmly  ;  and  with 
ut,  for  it  will  be  manifest  that  we  have  given  the 
occasion.  Without  this,  you,  the  tribe  of  Benja- 
min, would  not  now  have  dared  to  do  this  thing. 
They  will  reproach  us  with  having  brought  them 
under  the  curse  of  having  violated  their  oath,  inas- 
much as  you  have  obtained  their  daughters.  Then 
shall  we  say  to  them  (the  fathers) :  Be  quiet  and 
gentle ;  give  the  maidens  kindly  to  us.  You  know 
that  we  did  not  take  them  in  war,  as  booty,  as  for 
instance,  at  Jabesh.  We  have  indeed  allowed  them 
to  be  taken  (for  which  no  grudge  is  to  be  held 
against  Benjamin) ;  but  in  peace,  not  for  injury  : 
and  as  you  did  not  give  them,  no  guilt  attaches  to 
you.  What  else  could  we  do  to  provide  wives  for 
Benjamin,  without  involving  ourselves  in  the  curse 
of  a  broken  oath  ?  We  therefore  allowed  your 
daughters  to  be  seized,  but  not  as  captives  of  war. 
Your  daughters  have  gone  to  them  involuntarily  ; 
and  no  curse  can  come  on  you,  since  you  (Ed  not 
give  them  to  them.    The  emphasis  of  the  sentence 

lies  on  this  very  word  •"Onp^*  Since  we  permit- 
ted them  to  be  taken,  there  can  be  no  thought  of 
disgrace  and  war,  or  of  insult.  Therefore,  do  not 
contend ;  for  why  should  there  be  contention  where 
there  is  no  war.  The  "  elders  "  will  ask  forgive- 
ness for  themselves,  on  the  ground  that  they  meant 

it  well  with  the  seizure  (nCnpE?  *S7),  not 
in  war;  and  fathers  and  brothers,  whose  wrath 
against  Benjamin  has  now  subsided,  will  all  be  sat- 
isfied, as  soon  as  they  are  convinced  that  what  has 
been  done  does  not  render  them  liable  to  the  curse 
which  lights  on  oath-breakers.  For  the  oath  that 
bad  been  taken  was  latterly  the  chief  hindrance  in 
the  way  of  reconciliation  with  Benjamin. 

The  Benjamites,  thus  encouraged,  and  made  to 
feel  secure  against  bad  consequences,  actually  exe- 
cute the  proposed  exploit,  and  with  the  wives  thus 
won  return  happy  to  their  renovated  inheritance. 
Roman  history,  it  is  well  known,  has  a  celebrated 
occurrence  of  a  similar  nature  in  the  rape  of  the 
Sabine  women.  A  few  analogous  features  are  un- 
doubtedly observable  therein.  The  tribes  of  Italy 
refuse  to  enter  into  marriage  treaties  with  the  Ro- 
mans ;  and  the  latter  feared  the  destruction  of  their 
jcarcely  founded  state.  The  Sabine  rape  occurred 
in  the  fourth  month  of  Rome  (Plutarch,  Romulus, 
14)  ;  and  four  months  Benjamin  had  been  sitting 
in  the  rock  Rimmon.  Benjamin  received  only 
maidens  (vers.  12,  21) ;  and  only  maidens  likewise 
did  the  Romans  seize  (Plut.  I.  c. ;  Schwegler,  Rom. 
Gesch.  i.  478).  It  was  also  a  feast  for  which  the 
Sabine  women  appeared  in  Rome,  albeit  not  as 
active  participants.  In  Israel,  it  has  been  thought- 
fully conjectured,  the  dancing  maidens  perhaps  cel- 
ebrated the  memory  of  Miriam's  festive  chorus  of 
timbrel-striking  maidens,  when  Israel  had  safely 
passed  through  the  Red  Sea.  The  Romans  cele- 
brated the  consualia  on  the  anniversary  of  the  rape 
of  the  Sabine  maidens,  and  conceived  the  observ- 
ance sacred  to  the  sea-god.  In  like  manner,  the  ani- 
mal that  symbolized  Mars,  the  god  whom  Romulus 
chiefly  served  at  Rome,  was  the  wolf,  whom  also 
his  worshippers  did  not   disgrace.      Benjamin  is 

compared  with  a  wolf,  and  the  word  HP?7,  used  of 
the  seizure  of  the  virgins  (ver.  21),  is  afterwards 
applied  as  characterizing  the  wolf  l 

1  Cf.  the  Targum  on  Ezek.  xxii.  27,  and  my  Gold.  Thron. 
SaJomonis.  p.  164. 

2  The  usages,  also,  of  which  he  makes  mention,  as,  for 
hutanee     the  Spartan,    have   a   different   meaning.      The 


Schwegler  (Rdm.  Gesch.  i.  469)  declares  that  the 
rape  of  the  Sabines  is  a  myth,  sprung  from  the 
conception  of  marriage  as  a  robbery.-  But  it  ii 
precisely  in  this  story  that  the  seizure  of  women  is 
contrasted,  as  a  thing  improper  in  itself,  with  the 
regular  marriages  of  the  other  tribes.  The  idea 
of  the  narrative  is  rather  to  show  the  impossibility 
of  maintaining  laws  prohibiting  intermarriage  b» 
tween  different  tribes.  It  contained  the  lesson 
that  the  marriage  connections  of  men  overleap  the 
historical  divisions  of  tribes  and  families,  and  that 
just  as  the  ship  converts  the  separating  sea  into  an 
highway  of  fellowship  [Neptunus  Equestris,  for 
the  sea  is  a  steed),  so  connubium,  the  practice  of 
intermarriage,  is  the  commingling  of  different 
tribes.  Consualia  are,  therefore,  conjugalia ;  Consul 
is  Conjux :  the  veiling  and  concealment  connected 
with  his  festivals,  corresponds  to  the  concealment 
of  the  married  (nubere,  connubium),  and  the  sacrifice 
of  a  mule  corresponded  to  the  wish,  that  although 
the  union  was  one  of  heterogeneous  elements, 
analogous  to  that  from  which  the  animal  sprang, 
it  might  nevertheless  not  be  marked  by  the  barren- 
ness of  which  he  was  a  symbol. 

But  all  this  is  yet  more  clearly  taught  by  Benja- 
min's seizure  of  the  maidens  of  Shiloh.  Israel  is 
the  type  of  an  organic  nationality  with  different 
tribes.  Should  it  attempt  to  abolish  the  practice  of 
intermarriage,  the  result  must  be,  either  the  forci- 
ble taking  of  women,  or  the  death  of  a  member  of 
the  living  whole.  In  peace  the  Benjamites  regain 
what  they  had  lost  in  war.  An  ambuscade  almost 
annihilated  them  :  by  an  ambuscade  they  now  win 
new  life.  Then  Israel  lay  breathing  forth  wrath, 
in  desolate  wadys,  in  order  to  inflict  barrenness  : 
now,  Benjamin  lies  among  fertile  vine-hills,  in 
order  to  procure  a  blessing.  It  is  frightful  to  think 
of  Benjamin  dissolving  in  flames,  and  his  women 
and  maidens  falling  by  the  inexorable  sword ;  so 
that  it  must  be  acknowledged  a  grateful  change 
when  we  can  picture  to  ourselves  the  Benjamites 
hurrying  away  with  their  kidnapped  prizes.  But 
the  seeming  act  of  war  was  yet  not  without  its  ter- 
rors and  tears,  as  suddenly  the  timbrels  ceased  to 
sound,  and  daughters  screamed,  and  mothers  wept. 
It  was  an  image  of  war  sufficient  of  itself  to  mark 
the  horribleness  of  civil  war.  The  narrative  is 
given  for  the  purpose  of  pointing  out  into  what 
irregularities  a  people  naturally  falls  when  it  lacks 
the  organic  unity  of  one  general  regimen.  It 
closes  with  the  words,  which  might  form  the  super- 
scription of  the  entire  Book  :  "  There  was  no  king 
in  Israel,  and  every  man  could  do  what  seemed  right 
in  his  own  eyes." 

Concluding  Note. — The  time  in  which  the 
occurrence  at  Gibeah  and  the  events  that  grew 
out  of  it  took  place,  it  is  not  difficult  to  ascertain. 
Everything  points  back  to  the  time  in  which  the 
memories  and  traditions  of  Israel's  military  fellow- 
ship under  Joshua  were  yet  living  and  fresh.  It 
is  the  period  concerning  which  it  is  said,  Josh. 
xxiv.  31,  and  Judg.  ii.  7  :  "  And  the  people  served 
Jehovah  all  the  days  of  Joshua,  and  all  the  days 
of  the  elders  that  outlived  Joshua,  w»ho  had  seen 
all  the  great  works  of  Jehovah,  which  he  did  for 
Israel." 

It  is  also  evident  from  the  narrative  that  God 
was  still  zealously  served.  Com  sel  was  sought  froni 

mother  must  be  robbed  of  her  child  because  she  loves  11 
The  narrative  in  question  exhibits  the  necessity  of  robbery 
because  the  stranger  does  not  meet  with  love. 


260 


THE  BOOK  OF  JUDGES. 


(he  Urim  and  Thummim.  The  people  wept  and 
Listed  before  God.  They  brought  burnt-sacrifices 
and  peace-offerings.  Of  idolatry,  there  is  not  a 
trace.  Union  with  heathen  women  is  held  incon- 
ceivable. All  Israel  still  feels  itself  under  a  mili- 
tary  organization  such  as  obtained  under  Moses 
and  Joshua.  In  all  probability,  no  great  length 
of  time  had  elapsed  since  military  operations  for 
the  conquest  of  the  land  had  come  to  a  stand-still. 
From  Judg.  i.  22-26.  it  may  be  seen  what  great 
importance  was  attached  to  the  conquest  of  Bethel. 
When  the  house  of  Joseph,  in  whose  territory 
Shiloh  and  the  estate  of  the  high-priest  lay  (Josh. 
xxiv.  33),  went  up  against  Bethel,  "Jehovah  was 
with  them."  It  is  probable  that  from  that  time 
until  into  the  days  of  the  events  that  have  just 
been  related,  the  ark  of  the  covenant  was  at  Bethel, 
and  that  that  place  was  the  centre  of  military  ac- 
tions. The  ark  must,  however,  have  been  removed 
before  the  end  of  the  Benjamite  war;  for  when 
peace  is  restored,  it  is  found  in  Shiloh.  Its  stay  at 
Bethel  cannot  have  been  long,  for  there  is  there  no 
permanent  altar  (ch.  xxi.  4).  The  maidens  of 
Jabesh,  also,  are  not  brought  to  Bethel,  but  to 
Shiloh  (ch.  xxi.  12).  The  exodus  from  Egypt  is 
still  in  living  remembrance  (ch.  xix.  30).  Just  as 
after  the  death  of  Joshua,  the  order  was,  "  Judah 
first"  (ch.i.  1),  so  it  is  now  (ch.  xx.  18).  Nothing 
is  visible  as  yet  of  the  partial  efforts  of  single 
tribes.  All  this  is  most  clearly  deducible  from  the 
fact  that  Phinehas,  the  son  of  Eleazar,  and  the 
grandson  of  Aaron,  stands  at  the  head  of  the  sanc- 
tuary (ch.  xx.  28).  He  was  yet  one  of  those  who 
had  seen  the  great  works  of  Jehovah.  Eleazar, 
his  father,  had  died  after  Joshua.  Until  he  him- 
self died,  Israel's  religious  condition  was  doubtless 
such  as  is  described  in  ch.  ii.  7.  Moreover,  his 
name  and  character  suggest  the  inference  that  the 
events  just  treated  of,  are  immediately  connected 
with  the  preceding  great  age.  It  was  Phinehas 
whose  moral  zeal  incited  him  to  slay  the  sinning 
Israelite  in  the  territory  of  Moab,  for  which  act 
he  was  praised  as  having  "  turned  away  the  wrath 
of  God"  (Num.  xxv.  7-12).  To  him,  therefore, 
the  moral  indignation  of  Israel  over  the  criminal 
outrage  of  Benjamin,  is  doubtless  to  be  especially 
attributed.  He  had  been  selected  by  Moses  to  ac- 
company a  hostile  expedition  against  Midian  by 
which  Israel  had  been  seduced  into  heathen  prac- 
tices (Num.  xxxi.  6).  This  expedition  numbered 
twelve  thousand  nun,  —  one  thousand  from  each 
tribe.  The  expedition  against  Jabesh-Gilead  was 
organized  in  a  similar  manner.  If  this  type  of 
priestly  zeal  for  faith  and  purity  of  morals  stood  at 
the  head  of  Israel,  the  whole  war  against  Benjamin, 
at  least  so  far  as  its  motives  are  concerned,  becomes 
plain.  Before  this,  a  similar  war  against  the  two 
and  a  half  transjordanic  tribes  had  almost  occurred. 
These  tribes,  as  we  are  told  in  Josh,  xxii.,  had 
built  themselves  an  altar :  the  sons  of  Israel  this 
side  the  Jordan  thought  that  it  was  intended  for 
idolatrous  purposes.  They  came  together  in  Shi- 
ioh,  and  resolved  to  proceed  against  the  supposed 
apostates.  But  first  an  embassy  was  sent,  at 
whose  head  l'hinehas  again  stood  (ver.  13).  The 
address  which  he  made  to  them  is  altogether  in  the 
spirit  of  the  action  determined  on  against  Benja- 
min. 

But  it  is  precisely  this  last  named  occurrence 
that  enables  us  to  characterize  yet  more  narrowly 
the  catastrophe  related  in  chaps,  xx.  and  xxi.,  and 
to  comprehend  the  design  with  which  it  stands, 
nut  at  the  beginning,  but  at  the  close  of  the  Book, 
»nd  alongside  of  the  history  of  Micah.     It  is  not 


stated  that  a  solemn  embassy,  like  that  in  Josh 
xxii.  19  ff,  was  sent  to  Benjamin,  to  set  his  sia 
before  him  in  the  spirit  of  kindness.  Everything 
is  indeed  done  according  to  the  forms  of  the  law 
and  under  priestly  instruction,  but  with  such  as- 
sured consciousness  of  power,  and  with  such  car- 
nal fanaticism,  that  the  zeal  is  not  pleasing,  and  is 
finally  attended  by  lamentable  consequences.  The 
moral  motive  of  the  war  against  Benjamin  is  cer- 
tainly to  be  praised ;  but  the  blind  rage  in  victory 
is  of  the  flesh.  The  crime  of  Benjamin  was  hor- 
rible ;  but  the  unity,  determination,  and  perse- 
verance which  Israel  manifests  against  this  tribe, 
end  in  a  fanaticism  which  at  last  forgot  that  the 
war  was  waged  only  because  Benjamin  was  a 
brother,  and  that  he  was  treated  worse  than  national 
enemies  had  ever  been.  This  is  the  lesson  which 
the  narrator  designs  to  teach  by  placing  this  nar 
rative  at  the  close  of  his  Book,  lie  censures  what 
his  narrative  contained,  for  both  at  its  beginning 
and  at  its  close  he  says :  "  there  was  no  king  in 
those  days." 

In  the  next  place,  he  furnishes  an  opportunity 
to  compare  the  tribes  of  Dan  and  Benjamin  with 
each  other,  in  their  characters,  their  deeds,  and 
their  fortunes.  Both  were  preeminently  warlike. 
But  this  valor,  to  what  did  they  turn  it?  Why 
was  not  Dan  as  bold  against  the  Philistines  as 
against  peaceful  Laish  ?  or  why  did  not  Benjamin 
turn  his  martial  spirit  against  Jebus,  a  place  of 
such  importance  to  him  ?  Dan  founds  an  idolatrous 
worship  in  order  not  to  lose  his  tribe  consciousness ; 
and  Benjamin  defends  a  crime  by  way  of  resenting 
the  interference  of  other  tribes.  Dan's  offense, 
however,  is  justly  deemed  more  heinous  than  that 
of  Benjamin  ;  for  it  committed  ^spiritual  sin  against 
the  Spirit  of  the  eternal  God,  while  Benjamin  pro- 
tected a  terrible,  indeed,  but  yet  only  fleshly  crime. 
The  difference  shows  itself  also  in  the  consequences. 
It  is  true  that  both  Benjamin  and  Dan  lose  their 
proper  importance.  The  cities  and  territories  of 
both  are  taken  by  Judah.  But  the  hero  who  comes 
out  of  Dan,  Samson,  is  none  of  theirs  who  prac- 
tice idolatry  in  the  north.  His  fame  did  not  re- 
dound to  their  honor.  But  out  of  Benjamin  arose, 
after  this,  more  than  one  glorious  deliverer.  When 
he  was  yet  but  a  remnant,  Ehud  rose  up  in  the 
midst  of  him  to  be  a  deliverer.  Saul  and  Jona- 
than —  the  first  king  and  his  royal  son  —  were 
Benjamites. 

This  being  so,  the  narrator  allows  the  reproach 
to  fall  on  Israel  of  having  acted  so  differently  with 
respect  to  Dan  and  Benjamin.  In  the  face  of 
deeds  like  those  of  Micah  and  Dan,  it  remained 
inactive,  neither  warned  nor  took  any  other  meas- 
ure, although  the  sins  were  mortal  in  their  nature ; 
whereas  it  nearly  destroyed  Benjamin.  And  even 
before  these  occurrences  in  Benjamin,  where  was 
this  united  strength,  when,  in  disregard  of  the  law, 
heathen  people,  as  the  prophet  tells  them  in  ch.  ii., 
were  left  to  pursue  their  own  modes  of  life  and 
idol  service? 

It  was  this  that  drew  the  punishment  after  it. 
Had  the  external  unity  been  in  possession  of  its 
earlier  internal  strength,  not  only  would  the  vie 
tory  over  Benjamin  have  been  gained  more  quickly, 
but  the  servitude  under  foreign  foes  woulu  not 
have  come  so  soon.  The  observance  of  external 
forms,  the  customary  prayer,  the  usual  routine  of 
worship  in  war  and  peace,  are  of  no  avail,  unlesi 
animated  by  living  faith. 

Israel  felt  that  one  tribe  was  lacking  to  protect 
its  eastern  flank  on  the  Jordan,  when  Moab  in- 
vaded the  country.     True,  it  was  a  Benjamite, 


CHAPTER  XXI.   15-25. 


2t>, 


Ehnd,  who  delivered  the  country  from  the  tyrant, 
but  it  was  only  by  the  help  of  Ephraim  (ch.  iii. 
27)  that  he  gained  the  complete  victory.  His  own 
tribe  were  too  few  in  numbers.  Even  Saul  was 
still  conscious  that  he  came  from  the  smallest  tribe 
of  Israel  (1  Sam.  ix.  21),  although  under  him 
Israel  already  felt  that  "  there  was  a  king  in  the 
land." 

H0JIILET1CAL    AND    PRACTICAL.! 

The  Book  closes  with  two  highly  significant 
narratives.  In  connection  with  what  has  gone  be- 
fore, thev  demonstrate  the  insufficiency  of  the  exist- 
ing national  organization.  Even  under  the  great 
heroes,  national  unity,  in  the  full  sense  of  the 
word,  did  no  longer  exist.  Deborah  complains  of 
the  indifference  of  the  tribes  to  the  common  weal. 
Gideon  experiences  the  envy  of  Ephraim,  which 
under  Jephthah  breaks  out  into  bloody  hostility. 
Samson  stood  alone,  whom  his  own  people  them- 
selves propose  to  hand  over  to  the  enemy.  The 
Judgeship  affords  no  guaranty  of  national  unity. 
With  this,  there  is  wanting  also  concentrated  dis- 
cipline against  sin.  Sin,  therefore,  can  do  what  it 
will.  There  is  a  lack  of  authority.  Hence,  the 
Book  of  Judges  forms  the  introduction  to  the 
Books  of  the  Kings.  Both  concluding  narratives 
show  what  the  consequences  are  when  the  law  loses 
its  force,  when  faith  grows  weak,  when  apostasy 
breaks  loose,  and  subjective  arbitrariness  asserts 
itself.  The  first  sketches  more  particularly  the  de- 
cay of  nationality,  as  exhibited  in  the  arbitrari- 
ness of  the  individual ;  the  second,  the  discords 
that  result  from  the  passionate  procedures  of  the 
whole  nation.  The  arbitrariness  revealed  by  the 
first,  concerns  spiritual  matters ;  that  by  the  sec- 
ond, is  fleshly  in  its  nature.  The  first  shows  that 
against  the  service  of  God  anything  may  be  done 
with  impunity :  the  second,  that  for  fleshly  sins 
blood  is  made  to  flow  in  streams.  In  both  cases, 
iadeed,  sin  punishes  itself;  but  it  broke  forth,  be- 
cause every  one  did  what  he  would.  Moral  decay 
always  shows  itself  first  in  the  priestly  order.  In 
both  narratives,  the  frivolity  of  a  Levite  is  a  prin- 
cipal cause  of  the  lamentable  results  that  ensue. 
This  opens  the  way  to  subjective  arbitrviness  of 
every  kind,  which  superstition  uses  to  its  own  ad- 
vantage. Micah  builds  a  private  sanctuary,  and 
under  priestly  forms  sets  up  idolatry.  He  was 
punished  for  his  sin,  by  being  made  to  experience 
the  thing  he  had  done.  He  committed  a  robbery 
on  the  spirit  of  Israelitish  law,  and  he  was  robbed, 
by  Dan,  of  all  he  had  applied  to  this  purpose.  As 
he  had  done,  so  it  was  done  to  him.  The  arbitra- 
riness which  he  had  exercised,  was  pleasing  to 
others  also.  The  priest  who  had  sold  himself  to 
him,  departed  when  he  found  a  better  buyer.  The 
insubordination  allowed  the  individual,  because 
there  was  no  one  vested  with  general  authority, 
permitted  also  a  tribe  to  leave  its  appointed  terri- 
tory. One  tribe  (Dan),  strong  enough  to  rob  the 
weaker,  but  with  not  enough  spirit  to  win  the  land 
assigned  it  from  the  Philistines,  removes  into  a 
distant  region,  and  destroys  a  peaceable  city. 
Kobbery  and  murder  are  followed  by  permanent 
Idolatry  under  the  priestly  charge  of  a  descendant 
•>f  Moses. 

From  all  this  we  may  see  what  the  consequences 

1  [The  following  tf  Homiletical  and  Practical  "  paragraphs 
u*  boned  on  the  whole  of  "  Part  Third  "  of  the  Book,  from 
ibap-  xvii    to  xii.  inclusive      As  will  be  seen,  it  was  im. 


would  be  were  Christianity  to  become  wholly  in- 
active in  the  state.  Persons,  who  deem  them- 
selves virtuous,  suppose  that  the  religion  of  a  living 
God  is  by  no  means  absolutely  necessary  for  socia 
life.  But  as  soon  as  religion  falls  into  decay,  and 
before  its  influence  ceases  altogether,  the  moral 
supports  of  society  fall  to  pieces.  When  the  min 
isters  of  the  Word  begin  to  regard  good  positions 
more  than  truth,  ruin  is  at  hand.  Venality  is 
followed  by  its  evil  consequences,  although  lie  who 
is  ready  to  sell  himself  know  enough  of  the  lan- 
guage of  the  day  to  conceal  it.  A  Christian  must 
serve  no  idols.  The  more  surely,  therefore,  is  it  a 
sign  of  decay,  when  he  makes  a  business  of  serving 
superstition. 

Starke  :  The  creature  is  to  be  applied  for  God's 
honor,  but  not  in  honoring  him.  Arbitrariness  in 
parts,  leads  to  arbitrariness  in  the  whole.  If  the 
foundation-stone,  piety,  be  removed,  then  the  tribes, 
like  stones  of  a  building,  fall  apart.  The  fear  of 
God  is  the  beginning  of  all  wisdom,  and  also  the 
protector  of  all  peace. 

On  Chaps,  xix.-xxi. —  When  the  command  of 
God  is  no  longer  in  the  heart,  priests  become  car- 
nal, and  their  flocks  lawless.  As  the  Levite  runs 
after  a  concubine,  so  the  people  of  Gibeah  seek  the 
indulgence  of  bestial  lusts.  Who  will  imitate  the 
morals  of  a  master,  who  rejects  God's  sacred  com- 
mand. If  in  Gibeah  the  law  of  Jehovah  is  dis- 
honored with  impunity,  how  can  it  be  expected  that 
they  will  show  obedience  toward  their  brethren  ? 
Israel  is  indignant  at  the  sins  of  Benjamin,  but 
does  it  turn  away  from  its  own  ?  Virtuous  indig- 
nation is  not  difficult,  but  careful  self-examination 
is  more  necessary.  The  rod  may  undertake  to 
maintain  supremacy,  but  only  truth  can  succeed  in 
doing  it.  Civil  war  arises  not  from  political,  but 
from  moral  dangers.  The  love  of  peace  will  begin 
as  soon  as  self-righteousness  ceases.  Seb.  Schmidt 
observes  :  "  The  best  way  of  conciliating  an  enemy 
is  to  do  him  good."  But  kind  deeds  towards  an 
enemy  spring  only  from  love,  which  is  a  daughter 
of  repentance.  The  severest  judges  of  morals  often 
know  least  of  this  love.  Love  is  most  needed  when 
it  becomes  necessary  to  punish.  Israel  began  to 
grieve  bitterly  when  Benjamin  was  almost  de- 
stroyed. Men  recognize  only  when  too  late,  what 
the  root  was  in  the  beginning.  Lewdness  strangles 
compassion.  Carnal  zeal  consumes  considerate- 
ness.  Self-righteousness  irritates  the  minds  of 
men.  Only  at  the  altar  of  God,  through  the  pious 
priest,  does  peace  come  into  being. 

Gerlach  :  In  all  this  it  becomes  manifest  what 
Israel  might  have  been  and  continued  to  be,  if  it 
had  clung  faithfully  to  the  Lord  and  his  command- 
ments, and  had  preserved  its  covenant  with  the 
Lord,  and  by  that  very  means  its  national  purity, 
unimpaired. " —  The  same  :  The  people,  drawing 
near  to  God  in  the  presentation  of  expiatory  burnt- 
offerings,  sought  in  these  offerings  to  remove  the 
breach  between  the  holiness  of  the  Lord  and  thc-r 
own  sinfulness ;  and  in  the  sacred  meals  that  fol- 
lowed the  offering,  to  obtain  the  assurance  of  the 
assistance  of  divine  grace  as  they  went  forth  into 
the  holy  war. 

Only  where  the  gospel  is  heard  and  followed,  is 
there  peace.  For  that  reason,  the  Lord,  our  Sav- 
iour, says  to  all  his  disciples  :  Peace  be  with  you  ! 

practicable  to  place  them  under  the  several  parts  of  the 
text  to  which  they  refer,  according  to  the  plan  pursued  La 
the  other  parts  of  the  volume  (cf.  the  note  on  p.  19).  —  T«. 


Date  Due 

* x  vt  ^*^J    i 

"\P~"" 

> 

IV 

j 

*^W4 

3 

AC,  .      ^* 

.  ^^f^ 

_S£ft£*"W 

%R  1  1  1H 

V 

f) 

